High maintenance/low maintenance women--WHAT?

[kapri]

In the last few years the phrases "high maintenance" and "low maintenance" have been greatly overused to describe women. Leaving aside the fact that these terms are sexist (yes they are! ), what the heck do men mean when they use them? The first few times I heard "high maintenance," I figured it meant a woman who spends a lot of time and money on herself getting her hair and nails done, gone to tanning parlors, and so on--someone who only dates wealthy men who takes her to expensive restaurants in expensive cars. But I don't know--I see these phrases used more and more often, usually in some vague "she's not for me" kind of way, as if that label explains everything. It doesn't.

So men, what do you mean when you say someone is "high maintenance" or "low maintenance"?

[DivineComedienne]

I'm a female, but I'll respond. "High maintenance" to me means someone (man or woman) needs a lot of attention, reassurance, etc. This attention can be material (gifts and such) or sometimes just time and effort (constantly needs to be reassured that you care, wants frequent compliments). Some might call this "needy" or "insecure"; I call it "exhausting". It's like trying to fill a bucket when there's a hole in the bottom.

[TriPolar]

Maintenance could be about spending money on her, spending a lot of time with her, dealing with her emotional needs, or anything else the guy would rather do less of. High maintenance, a lot of that stuff, low maintenance not much.

[Rigamarole]

Originally Posted by TriPolar

Maintenance could be about spending money on her, spending a lot of time with her, dealing with her emotional needs, or anything else the guy would rather do less of. High maintenance, a lot of that stuff, low maintenance not much.

Exactly. It's: how much effort does the man have to put in to assure that she will continue having sex with him. I thought those terms were self-explanatory.

[Der Trihs]

Originally Posted by kapri

In the last few years the phrases "high maintenance" and "low maintenance" have been greatly overused to describe women. Leaving aside the fact that these terms are sexist (yes they are! ), what the heck do men mean when they use them?

I don't think they are sexist; I've heard the terms used about men too, and used by women. As said; they refer to how some people demand a lot more investment in time/money/emotion than others. Sort of the mirror image of calling someone "clingy"; among other things, demanding that you be clingy is an example of being high maintenance.

[billfish678]

Heck, when it comes to describing a typical human, I work in this order:

Dead or Alive?

Male or Female?

High maintenance or Low mainenance?

[Joey P]

I think Divine nailed it. Exhausting. If you're dating someone and every time they call, text, email, facebook or yell your name the first thing you thing is "uhhh, now what", you're probably with someone high maintenance. Obviously, that's grossly over simplifying, but I think it's about right.

[diku]

And it's not even specifically relationship based...you have high-maintenance and low-maintenance friends. Some require constant contact, others not so much.

I don't consider it sexist. I think it just gives a good description of lots of little things that happen in human contact.

[kapri]

Originally Posted by Rigamarole

Exactly. It's: how much effort does the man have to put in to assure that she will continue having sex with him. I thought those terms were self-explanatory.

It's just that I keep hearing people use them in so many different ways that I wasn't sure what they meant. I feel like these are throwaway terms used as an excuse for treating someone poorly or putting them down.

And I've never heard a woman say a man was high-maintenance. I've heard plenty of men say that about women, though.

Also, I'm an English teacher, editor, and writer, and I sort of insist on precision with regard to language, so when something seems vague to me, I question it.

[billfish678]

Originally Posted by kapri

It's just that I keep hearing people use them in so many different ways that I wasn't sure what they meant. I feel like these are throwaway terms used as an excuse for treating someone poorly or putting them down.

Well, I think most people who label others high maintenance aren't trying to give em a compliment.

[Candyman74]

This has been used for a lot more than the last few years - I've heard it all my life, at the very least (so I presume it was common before that, too). So it was common at least as far back as the 70s.

I've heard it used about men, too, but only in the last few years.

[Icarus]

Have you heard of the term "drama queen"? IMHO this is a variety of a High Maintenance individual. They are perpetually late, never have money, car is always in need of service, job situation is shaky, relationships are a mess, maybe even ongoing health issues - and they must tell you all about each and every one of these every time you speak or meet.

[Swallowed My Cellphone]

Originally Posted by diku

And it's not even specifically relationship based...you have high-maintenance and low-maintenance friends. Some require constant contact, others not so much.

I don't consider it sexist. I think it just gives a good description of lots of little things that happen in human contact.

I don' t think it's sexist either, for the very reason quoted. Guys can be just as high maintenance and friends can be high maintenance, not just girlfriends.

For me "high maintenance" is some one who a) requires constant validation and reassurance because their self-esteem is sucky, b) tend to come with a lot of baggage/drama, c) both a+b.

If the relationship or friendship requires an abnormal amount of energy to maintain, then it's "high maintenance".

[Joey P]

Originally Posted by kapri

It's just that I keep hearing people use them in so many different ways that I wasn't sure what they meant. I feel like these are throwaway terms used as an excuse for treating someone poorly or putting them down.

On the contrary if someone is calling their girlfriend high maintenance (not something you typically say to her face) they normally treat her very well. A high maintenance woman doesn't thrive in a relationship where she is being treated poorly or put down on any kind of a regular basis. Also, often times 'high maintenance woman' has the assets necessary to find a new guy that won't treat that way and will quickly leave the first guy and attach herself to the second, sometimes not in that order.

[ultrafilter]

High maintenance people operate on the assumption that all of their problems are your problems too.

[Manda JO]

Originally Posted by Joey P

On the contrary if someone is calling their girlfriend high maintenance (not something you typically say to her face) they normally treat her very well. A high maintenance woman doesn't thrive in a relationship where she is being treated poorly or put down on any kind of a regular basis. Also, often times 'high maintenance woman' has the assets necessary to find a new guy that won't treat that way and will quickly leave the first guy and attach herself to the second, sometimes not in that order.

That's one variant, but there's also the person who is highly insecure high maintenance--they will stick with an abusive girlfriend/boyfriend forever, locked in a co-dependent dance and draining all of their friends emotionally dry as they careen from crisis to crisis.

[Sunspace]

Originally Posted by kapri

... The first few times I heard "high maintenance," I figured it meant a woman who spends a lot of time and money on herself getting her hair and nails done, gone to tanning parlors, and so on--someone who only dates wealthy men who takes her to expensive restaurants in expensive cars....

Originally Posted by Joey P

On the contrary if someone is calling their girlfriend high maintenance (not something you typically say to her face) they normally treat her very well. A high maintenance woman doesn't thrive in a relationship where she is being treated poorly or put down on any kind of a regular basis. Also, often times 'high maintenance woman' has the assets necessary to find a new guy that won't treat that way and will quickly leave the first guy and attach herself to the second, sometimes not in that order.

These two seem to be slightly incongruous. If she's quite capable of providing her own mink and Rolls, why would she need someone else to provide them? I think we're talking about two different people here: the self-sufficient person who enjoys all the luxe trappings, and can provide them, but who can also function perfectly well without them; and the person who wants someone else to provide them, and won't look at anyone who can't.

To me, "high maintenance" implies someone who demands all that you can supply and more, with no guarantee of a corresponding return. That supply could be money, travel, emotional support, any of dozens of things. And you're never certain where you stand. Being with a person like that is a kind of unending grovel.

"Low maintenance" means the person is self-sufficent, whether that be in a penthouse or a tent, and can give and take in an adult relationship. No big sucky needy sound.

[Joey P]

The first quote is from the OP, they are asking if they are correct in their assumption. And while someone who can and does buy their own mink and Rolls could be considered High Maintenance, it typically happens more on the emotional rather then financial level. Of course high maintenance seems to be kind of a catch all term to mean some one that Always.Needs.Something. (Be it a new Rolls, to be told they don't look fat, to be comforted because they think the new upstairs neighbor that they haven't met yet doesn't like them since he didn't say hi when he passed her on the stairs and oh my god she's calling again what the hell does she want now, etc... )

[Unintentionally Blank]

What's actually worse is _self-maintaining_ women. I was dating a trust-fund baby in a previous life and she had the nerve to say "You know, I'm only keeping you around for the companionship". The unsaid implication being: "I don't need you, I can jettison you at any time I want."

Which, come to think of it, she did! (And it was the best thing that coulda happened to me).

[monstro]

I don't think it's sexist at all. I use it to describe myself. I'm a low maintenance chick. Just wash and go.

Some women like to known as high maintenance, because they interpret that phrase to mean that they take care of themselves and expect only the best.

[xoferew]

You can also have a high maintenance car that you're always washing and buffing and tuning up under the hood, right? Or a high maintenance dog that needs lots of grooming and clipping and organic food that you make in the blender? Some people take pride in having high maintenance stuff in their life.

[kapri]

Originally Posted by Unintentionally Blank

What's actually worse is _self-maintaining_ women. I was dating a trust-fund baby in a previous life and she had the nerve to say "You know, I'm only keeping you around for the companionship". The unsaid implication being: "I don't need you, I can jettison you at any time I want."

Which, come to think of it, she did! (And it was the best thing that coulda happened to me).

What else did you want her to keep you around for? I'm genuinely curious. Did you want to help her out with her expenses or give her gifts? I can't figure out why what she said bothered you. Don't most men want women who are self-sufficient and not needy?

[Rigamarole]

Originally Posted by kapri

Don't most men want women who are self-sufficient and not needy?

Not really. Men want to feel like a protector/provider. Our society can fight it all it wants, but that primal feeling is hard-wired, biological, and never ever going away.

[Unintentionally Blank]

Originally Posted by kapri

What else did you want her to keep you around for? I'm genuinely curious. Did you want to help her out with her expenses or give her gifts? I can't figure out why what she said bothered you. Don't most men want women who are self-sufficient and not needy?

The inference was that there was no "for better or worse", you don't please me, yer out. It turned me into an accessory.

[Autolycus]

IMO this term can refer to a lover or friend who is:

a) clingy
b) excessively time-demanding
c) low on self-esteem / constantly seeking validation\
d) a combination of the above

[Dave Hartwick]

Originally Posted by Candyman74

This has been used for a lot more than the last few years - I've heard it all my life, at the very least (so I presume it was common before that, too). So it was common at least as far back as the 70s.

I've heard it used about men, too, but only in the last few years.

The phrase "high maintenance" has certainly been around but the first time I remember hearing it used in a relationship context was after the movie When Harry Met Sally popularized it in '89.

[billfish678]

Originally Posted by Rigamarole

Not really. Men want to feel like a protector/provider. Our society can fight it all it wants, but that primal feeling is hard-wired, biological, and never ever going away.

I'd argue that its more often that women expect that or they hit the road...

[pulykamell]

Originally Posted by Autolycus

IMO this term can refer to a lover or friend who is:

a) clingy
b) excessively time-demanding
c) low on self-esteem / constantly seeking validation\
d) a combination of the above

I agree. And the term is not sexist in the least--it's equally applicable to men and women. In fact, the only person I regularly characterized as "high maintenance" was a male friend of mine. Somebody who is "high maintenance" requires constant attention and validation.

[Sunspace]

Originally Posted by monstro

Some women like to known as high maintenance, because they interpret that phrase to mean that they take care of themselves and expect only the best.

"Take care of themselves"? Fine. "Expect only the best"? That's a bit of a red flag to me; it sounds like someone who always orders the most expensive thing on the menu with no thought as to whether the date treating can afford it.

[Thudlow Boink]

Originally Posted by Dave Hartwick

The phrase "high maintenance" has certainly been around but the first time I remember hearing it used in a relationship context was after the movie When Harry Met Sally popularized it in '89.

Yeah, according to the Random House Historical Dictionary of American Slang by way of Wiktionary, that's what popularized it.

Originally Posted by kapri

Also, I'm an English teacher, editor, and writer, and I sort of insist on precision with regard to language, so when something seems vague to me, I question it.

The original, literal meaning of "high-maintenance" had to do with machines, cars, etc. that actually require maintenance (tune-ups, repairs, preventative maintenance). To use the phrase of people or relationships is—or at least, has its origins in—metaphor. And I don't know if you can demand that metaphorical language be precise.

[Ludovic]

Originally Posted by Thudlow Boink

And I don't know if you can demand that metaphorical language be precise.

I only use the term high-maintenance for women who are fast machines who always keep their motors clean.

[Cat Whisperer]

Originally Posted by Swallowed My Cellphone

<snip>
If the relationship or friendship requires an abnormal amount of energy to maintain, then it's "high maintenance".

That's how I look at it - everything is just difficult with high-maintenance people - getting ready to go out is difficult, having a conversation is difficult, going on a trip is difficult, going on a spur-of-the-moment picnic is difficult (actually, I don't think "spur-of-the-moment" ever happens with high maintenance people).

[Chicken Fingers]

My partner is a man, and I consider him high maintenance. He's worth it, but it takes its toll on me.

[SecretaryofEvil]

Aww, looks like someone called kapri high-maintenance.

I agree with the consensus. You seemed to conflate a woman who puts a lot of maintenance into her appearance, with a person who requires a lot of all around maintenance from his or her relationship partner. The latter example is what someone means when they call a person they are dating "high maintenance."

I don't think it's sexist. I have heard women call men high maintenance.

[Nava]

Originally Posted by kapri

What else did you want her to keep you around for? I'm genuinely curious. Did you want to help her out with her expenses or give her gifts? I can't figure out why what she said bothered you. Don't most men want women who are self-sufficient and not needy?

Some men do...

Originally Posted by Rigamarole

Not really. Men want to feel like a protector/provider. Our society can fight it all it wants, but that primal feeling is hard-wired, biological, and never ever going away.

... some don't.

Which, if you strike out "men" and substitute "people", can be assigned to any human characteristic or desire. People are just complicated.

I've known guys who were extremely happy to have "her with me because she wants me, not because she needs me". I've known others who were unable to accept my help until I framed it on terms that made it sound like it was them who were helping me by sending work my way. You just have to figure out which kind you're dealing with, every time.


The Spanish for "high maintenance" is either "una mujer cara/un tipo caro" (an expensive person) or "demasiado trabajo" (too much work). Trophy spouses are "expensive", but for those who like having one they're not "too much work"; if the trophy loses its gilt, though... it suddenly becomes "too much work".

[Manda JO]

Originally Posted by Cat Whisperer

That's how I look at it - everything is just difficult with high-maintenance people - getting ready to go out is difficult, having a conversation is difficult, going on a trip is difficult, going on a spur-of-the-moment picnic is difficult (actually, I don't think "spur-of-the-moment" ever happens with high maintenance people).

IME, spur-of-the-moment happens ALL THE TIME with these people and it always ends up a thousand times more complicated than it needs to be. You have the picnic, yes, but it's two hours later than you wanted, no one is really satisfied with the final food or location selections, and someone's nursing hurt feelings.

[Nava]

It's always "their" spur, though, never yours. If you're the one suggesting something, it gets shot down so fast you're left wondering whether anybody got the plate number off that star destroyer.

Note that this applies only to those who are high-maintenance emotionally: some people like their expensive clothes and their massages, but so long as it doesn't interfere with already-set plans are perfectly happy to perform their assigned arm-decoration duties (which do require the clothes and massages and whatnot, after all).

[SecondJudith]

Originally Posted by Unintentionally Blank

What's actually worse is _self-maintaining_ women.

I'm also confused about how this is worse! Oh no, my partner can look after herself - what a horror!

[Unintentionally Blank]

Originally Posted by SecondJudith

I'm also confused about how this is worse! Oh no, my partner can look after herself - what a horror!

You're missing the subtle: Not only can I look out for myself, I don't much need you for anything other than a poke. Go stand next to the credenza.

Part of the stickiness in marriage is that you can't MAKE brash decisions, they all take time...enough time for things to get worked out.

Keep in mind the age of the people involved at the time. (which I haden't mentioned, but will now for clarity). She was 28, wanting a kid before 30, I was 24, just out of college and working temp/contract jobs. She had two cars, two houses, two dogs, and a portfolio. At one end, she'd offering to buy me a NEW CAR if I'd pop the question, and on the other, she's bitching that she wanted to go out to dinner, again, was upset she had to pay for it again, to a guy that was making a tenth of her income. I had a car, a computer, a week's clothing, and 1/3rd rent with two other guys.

She then says, and tone of voice is critical, "You know, you're just here for the companionship."

Is _that_ conveying the negative aspect? Hey, if you're happy with a relationship on such uneven terms, good-onya, but I'd live it first. I didn't want to be the entertainment/sperm-donor.

There was also the untreated bi-polar disorder...it was a real treat!

[SecondJudith]

That's not just self-maintaining, that sounds like an unequal relationship for other reasons - you both wanted different things out of it than the other wanted, or was willing to give.

I'm not quite sure why companionship is a bad thing, but I'm sure there was some subtext and history there that made it so.

[Unintentionally Blank]

Originally Posted by SecondJudith

That's not just self-maintaining, that sounds like an unequal relationship for other reasons - you both wanted different things out of it than the other wanted, or was willing to give.

I'm not quite sure why companionship is a bad thing, but I'm sure there was some subtext and history there that made it so.

It's not a bad thing, it was the ONLY thing.

[kapri]

Originally Posted by SecretaryofEvil

Aww, looks like someone called kapri high-maintenance.

I agree with the consensus. You seemed to conflate a woman who puts a lot of maintenance into her appearance, with a person who requires a lot of all around maintenance from his or her relationship partner. The latter example is what someone means when they call a person they are dating "high maintenance."

I don't think it's sexist. I have heard women call men high maintenance.

Actually, the guy I'm dating recently called me low maintenance, but a few years ago someone else--someone who knew me but never dated me--called me high maintenance. That got me wondering how I could be perceived as both and exactly what it meant, and then I started noticing that people were saying it everywhere online. When I saw someone say it here on a dating thread, I started this poll to see if I could get a handle on exactly what people meant when they used the phrase. If you can't tell, the phrase really bugs me, because it seems patronizing.

Honestly, I actually did think it referred to a woman who required a lot of maintenance, such as weekly mani/pedis, frequent trips to the hair salon, expensive handbags, and so on, which is part of what confused me, since I require none of those things and in fact actively avoid them. My female friends and I have discussed it, and since most of my friends are feminist, they are disgusted by the phrase and view it as something a man says about a woman who demands respect from them--someone who is not available for booty calls and so on.

Now I see that many people think of something else when they use the phrase, although the meaning is still fairly vague. In the last year or so I have been reading everything I can about the nuances of relationships between men and women, and this is just one small aspect of that larger research.

Yes, I know I'm overthinking this.

[Nava]

Originally Posted by kapri

Yes, I know I'm overthinking this.

Gee, you must be a Doper! Do you guys think we could get that listed in the DSM-V?

[kapri]

Originally Posted by SecondJudith

I'm also confused about how this is worse! Oh no, my partner can look after herself - what a horror!

Yes. I know many women, including myself, who through choice or chance live alone and are financially independent. They know how to take care of themselves and their property and belongings and have lots of friends and full social lives. Many of these women are not in long-term relationships. If men want women who need them, then perhaps a woman who can take care of herself turns them off because he doesn't see a role for himself in this kind of scenario? That's difficult for me to understand. Just because a woman can take care of her own stuff doesn't mean she doesn't want a man in her life.

My ex-husband told me the thing that attracted him most to me was how independent I was. I always figured men liked independent women, not needy, clingy women.

[SecondJudith]

Originally Posted by Unintentionally Blank

It's not a bad thing, it was the ONLY thing.

You were 24 years old and in a relationship with a woman who you liked spending time with, and that was a problem? Did you want a long-term commitment? Because I didn't get that impression from your summary, but I might have missed something. Of course, if you didn't like spending time with her, I can see why that would be bad.

[Unintentionally Blank]

Originally Posted by SecondJudith

You were 24 years old and in a relationship with a woman who you liked spending time with, and that was a problem? Did you want a long-term commitment? Because I didn't get that impression from your summary, but I might have missed something. Of course, if you didn't like spending time with her, I can see why that would be bad.

Yes. You're missing the bi-polar power trip. You know that whole "better than the sum of it's parts thing?" there was no way that was going to happen. There was pressure from her biological clock to get things done, and there was the condescending concept that I was there only to provide sperm and the morning paper.

Being a companion is necessary, being self-sufficient is also good...telling a person "all I need from you is companionship" is condescending. You weren't there, and I can see I'm failing to convey the negativity. Just saying: no maintenance can be as bad as high-maintenance, in a different way.

[Nava]

Paraphrasing my male friend quoted above, it sounds to me like she wasn't so much saying "I'm with you because I want you, not because I need you" as "I'm putting up with you only for as long as I feel like it". The first one is nice if you like self-assured, un-needy women; the second one... ugh, he's a dude, not a box of Kleenex!

[JohnT]

ETA: NM, the point has been covered...

[kapri]

Originally Posted by Unintentionally Blank

Being a companion is necessary, being self-sufficient is also good...telling a person "all I need from you is companionship" is condescending. You weren't there, and I can see I'm failing to convey the negativity. Just saying: no maintenance can be as bad as high-maintenance, in a different way.

But what if you were in love with someone like that, and she with you? A no-maintenance person can still fall in love with a man and want him around for companionship and cuddling. Does that turn men off, too?

Still trying to figure all of this out.

[Unintentionally Blank]

I think the love (boat? ) had sailed by that point.

I -need- my wife. She makes me a better person. We compliment each other. That is MORE than companionship for companionship's sake. You just want a companion, adopt a dog. But then they're totally reliant on you and the analogy falls apart.