It’s not a bad thing, it was the ONLY thing.
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.
Gee, you must be a Doper! Do you guys think we could get that listed in the DSM-V?
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.
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.
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!
ETA: NM, the point has been covered…
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.
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.
If your hanging around self described feminists and reading all you can (unless its from actual scientific journals) your are probably making your self less knowledgable about how men and women behave and relate.
I agree that contempt is a total relationship-killer, but it seems from what you’ve said that that was the problem – contempt and lack of respect – not self-sufficiency or lack thereof.
My husband and I love each other very much and get along very well, but I wouldn’t say we need each other. I can potter along happily at home on my own while he is out at work drinks, and vice-versa, and we have gone on holiday without each other (long weekends for friends’ hen and stag dos). It is much less nice to be without him than with him, but neither of us falls apart without the other one.
It seems patronizing because it is meant to be. High maintenance is not a complement. It is a catch all phrase to refer to any woman who is any combination of vain, shallow, materialistic, opinionated (in a stupid and shrill manner), entitled, and emotionally needy. As someone mentioned above, they are like a bucket with a hole in it that must constantly be filled with praise, validation, and material items. If the bucket ever empties (which it will because nothing is ever good enough), they pitch a fit.
Trophy wives ARE high maintenance because, much like a high end car, they must constantly serviced. Usually at the spa or department store. A high maintenance woman doesn’t have to have to be rich though. But they usually have a sense of entitlement that they deserve to be (for reasons known only to themselves).
You’re confusing high-maintenance with independence. The wife and I do all those things. There has to be a balance.
I’m confused about the difference between “self-maintaining women” and what I’ve described. I certainly don’t think either my husband or I are high-maintenance!
Just to confuse the issue even more, you could say there are high maintenance people who are self maintaining and high maintenance people that are not.
It never even occurred to me that anyone might find those terms sexist.
I’m a man. My brother is high-maintenance. So is my brother-in-law. It’s not sexist at all, but rather indicates to me anyone who is self-absorbed and who requires constant verbal coddling, deference, and agreement with everything they say. Its meaning to you is your own interpretation.
I think it’s been determined: I cannot help you. 
Yes, this boggles my mind. I’ve used them in reference to both men and women. Hell, they’re not even necessarily good or bad things, but relative to what one is willing to give and what one wants to receive out of a relationship. It’s not terribly unlike how when you’re driving on the highway, how cars at different relative speeds are going faster or slower. Hell, it’s not even really a description of the person but of the nature of the relationship unless, perhaps, most or all of that person’s relationships are high or low maintence.
Using myself as an example, I’m introverted, so I tend to not need a whole lot out of relationships in general relative to average. As a consequence, when I’ve dated extroverted women where they want more out of it and are willing to put in more it creates an imbalance where I see her as high-maintenence because I feel like I’m putting in more relative to what I need because I’m trying to keep her happy. Similarly, she views me as high maintenence because she wants to put in more to get more, but because I struggle to reach that level, she feels like she’s putting in what she should and not getting everything she needs. When you have an appropriate balance, this doesn’t happen, or happens to a lesser degree.
Of course, it’s not always two way like that, particularly with family relationships where they aren’t unlikely to be imbalanced where one person brings a whole bunch of drama or whatever.
I’m still not really sure how it can possibly be sexist though. I could see if maybe someone said all women are high-maintenence or something to that effect, but I’ve met plenty who are even lower maintenence than me and plenty of men who are extremely high maintenence.