Any woman who won’t allow people to visit her in the hospital after giving birth without fixing her hair (as best as possible) and putting on make-up.
Also, my hubby’s co-worker: Way over-dyed, over-styled hair (visits the salon every 4 weeks), bi-monthly manicures, won’t let people see her without makeup, wears WAY TOO MUCH makeup, must agonize over what to wear every day. And then complains about being unattractive.
I’d say anyone who expects as a matter of course that he or she will get {whatever} from a relationship without having to give anything back. {whatever} might be emotional support, financial support, physical tending, or whatever. I’m pretty low-maintenance myself, as my so’s tend to be, so I don’t have any particular anecdotes to throw into the mix.
So – do we all get to do a singsong version of “Davebear has a girlfriend” or what? Who’s doing what to who that you’re looking for reinforcement from us?
To me “high maintenance” = needy. And if you stay in a relationship with a high maintenance person, their needs - whatever they may be - will take up all your time.
I could write the book on this. But I won’t.
“High maintenance” refers to roles. It means that one half of the relationship is insisting that their role is ‘receiver’, and the other’s role is ‘provider/giver’.
What they insist on receiving may vary, from good old material goods to endless emotional support and crisis drainage. But the underlying pattern is the same. The person gets their sense of status and esteem from their success at manipulating the other person into fitting the ‘provider/giver’ role.
Any attempt to change the roles (e.g. to two people sharing the ‘giver/taker’ role as appropriate) results in a fuss, tantrum or argument.
A relationship with someone who insists on these roles is a relationship in name only. It’s really an elaborate support mechanism for the spavined self-esteem of the ‘I’m the receiver’ half. In a real relationship worth the name, both parties pursue flexible roles as circumstances dictate, and they want to. They say, “I can be your friend, your companion, your lover, your confidante, your secrets-sharer, your moon, myth and stars, your greatest ally and your enemy’s worst nightmare, your supporter and your supported, your hand-in-hand and your yours-is-mine, and I want to be”. If that’s not what you’re hearing, keep on looking.
Ianzin, maybe you should write that book. Your summation could serve as the ultimate text-book definition. I survived a relationship in which the ‘receiver’ expected everything from material goods to the never-ending ‘emotional support and crisis drainage.’ High maintenance+++++ It left me so drained that it will probably take years for me to even consider another serious relationship. Bleh!
My last fling guy was definitely high maintenance. He is extremely touchy-- you never know when something you’ve said will offend him, and if it does, he says, “I don’t want to talk about that!” and then gets very hostile if the subject is not dropped immediately. Once, when he was eating dinner with me and a friend of mine, she was telling me a story about an argument she had; he told her not to talk while we were eating. I told him to go eat in the living room if he didn’t want to hear it; he sulked.
Also, he would frequently mention how great he thought he was, and would gladly bask in any praise I gave him (and I like to be liberal with praise), but he was rather fond of criticizing me. When I tried to talk to him about my mother, or my job, or anything that bothered me, he’d cut me off because it was “too negative” for him… but he felt free to complain at length about his own problems, all of which were of his own making.
And he was chronically 1-2 hours late for dates or meetings, and not apologetic at all.
Sorry, just had to vent. You can see why it was a fling and not a relationship. Maybe he was insecure, as some people have stated, but I think he’s just an egotist who is so totally high on himself that it never occurs to him that he might like to do things another way.
I’ve always considered high maintenence people to just be super needs and in peretual need of validation.
My X was VERY much high-maitenence. He would constantly ask me why I was with him and always call himself a loser and I’d be expected to start in with the “no you’re not honey” speech.
One of his favorite lines was “yes, you’re dating a loser” and “would you stay with me if (insert any random circumstance here)” This was almost a daily freakin’ routine.
Oh, and he’d always be on the internet or have the net logged on even when he was doing something else and didn’t have a cell phone so you could never reach him unless you actually physically went to his house. He’d be logged on for days. Never checked email either (he was an EQ junkie :rolleyes:). Drove me nuts. I bought him a cell phone for Xmas (hint hint), pre-paid because he was poor as hell (man, why was I with him for so long?) and he would let it run out of minutes and never put more on. But if I didn’t answer any of my three phones (I like to be very reachable) he’d go apeshit.
That’s what I ended up dumping him for, when he went a whole week being unreachable (I refused to go to his house out of principal at that point, I had voiced my concerns to him over and over, I mean shit, we’d been together for 2 fucking years and he still didn’t get it??) and randomly showed up at my house. That was the last time he ever came over. 
Whew. Sorry for the hijack. Happened a month ago and I still hadn’t really vented.
This guy wasn’t like that “all the time” really, it was just the intensity of it, and the way he’d get it SOOOO twisted up.
And there was no discussing it rationally, once he got it into his head that I’d “meant something” so amount of "no, that’s not what I meant would calm him down, he would get so riled up.
If a person got their feelings hurt and then grumped about it, but was willing to discuss the misunderstanding rationally that would be one thing, but to turn from a normal conversation to drama queen in 0-60 seconds with no end in sight was the “high maintenance” part.
Winston Churchill wasn’t it?
Ah, I would also define “high maintenance” on the male end of things as being guys who cannot STAND not to have all the newest gadgets and doohickies available.
I’ve always been a big believer of “make do or do without” when it’s not super crucial to have something. But men who always have to buy the PRIMO top end EVERYTHING bug me.
I don’t know why, it just does. For some reason it strikes me as somewhat of weakness and being “spoiled” for no reason.
Paging Kalhoun! 
Would ya’? I love singalongs! 
Well, that just leads to the question of how one defines “needy”. I’ve always thought that was another sort of “catchall” phrase like nice guys.
Sounds like a good definition, to me. But, I wonder if there isn’t more to it, based on what summerbreeze said, and the impression I’m getting from the other posts.
It seems like whether someone is considered HM, or not, may be largely due to the other person’s expectations. Some of the people described here, I don’t think anyone would argue, are definitely HM. But, summerbreeze’s ex probably considered her “too nice”, “too passive”, or “a doormat”, to use some of the expressions from the thread I linked to, because his expectations were different. I imagine it must work the other way, too.
I would think people who grew up with “doormats” as role models would find most normal people too demanding, and consider them HM. Does that make sense?
I agree. Demanding and draining without rewards!!!
Heart On My Sleeve and Ianzin nailed the essentials dead on. A high-maintenance person, male or female is a relationship remora, and that relationship doesn’t have to be overtly romantic. Friends and family can qualify too. They attach themselves to an “other” but the flow of sustenance only goes one way.
(I thought about comparisons to mirrors or vampires. Mirrors are at least entirely passive but by mythology vampires might be a better analogy. They’re reputed to at least give a certain deceptive glamour in return. But to continue…)
Any relationship involves give-and-take but healthy ones find a balance. I hate killing spiders, dinking with my car and dither with shyness at parties. He hates cooking, dinking with laundry and can’t understand why his cow-orkers act like such neurotic shits. Or whatever; endless variations apply. Strengths and weakness mesh.
High-maintenance people aren’t friends or lovers. (And flunk family, for that matter.) They’re users. They’re so tightly focused on their desires that givers aren’t partners but sustaining resources. Of course resources must be replaced if falter or something more promising comes along, though not without great inconvenience…
I’ve seen a few–very few–instances of high maintenance balanced by high-and-equal devotion. Damned few, though. Most others have been remora attached to hosts of varying degrees of awareness and/or willingness.
Veb
Well, this topic certainly seems to inspire passionate responses. 
Anyone care to comment on my hypothesis regarding the variances in individual tolerance? (Wow! That sounded stodgy.)
I think you meant saps, but zaps is an interesting typo.
Davebear thanks for the thread - I have found out that my ex was high-maintenance without me really knowing it!
My (previous) definition of HM had been mostly physical - the primping, fussing and general big production necessary to present yourself to the (hopefully adoring) public. This also included the gifts and baubles routine - you are expected to put endless thought and effort into finding the PERFECT six month anniversary gift, etc. My definition was too narrow.
I broke up with my ex after a long (4 1/2 yr) relationship. She displayed none of the attributes that I HAD associated with HM - she looked great without makeup, could wake up, put on a hat and go out, was just happy that I even remembered certain days, etc. So in my mind, NOT HM.
But she WAS emotionally HM. I spent years reassuring her that the world was NOT out to get her, that the car dealer did NOT set out to make her the sucker of the decade, etc, etc, etc. I noticed that what used to be normal conversations left me drained - an hour on the phone with her would wipe me out for the night. It wasn’t until my sister (who I talk to about every two weeks) mentioned that she noticed something different in me that I began to realize that something was wrong. I never defined it as HM, but I did say that she was a “negative person.”
She was a taker…a “relationship remora” as it was so aptly put earlier.
Color me surprised when I clicked on this thread thinking “I wonder people have to say?” and two minutes later saying “Holy cow! That was her!”
My husband and I had friends over for dinner last night and we were talking about this same thing - what defines high maintenance, etc.
They have a friend whose wife wouldn’t see her NEWBORN BABY after she gave birth until she was able to do her hair and makeup!!! I was stunned. She became our benchmark for high maintenance.
We then proceeded to go through all the couples we know and identify which member was more high maintenance. Loads of fun!
Count me in among those who hadn’t considered emotionally needy/draining individuals as “high maintenance.” Given some of the definitions on this thread, I would never jokingly refer to my best friend as HM.
My definition has always revolved around someone being very particular about things and wanting those things in a particular way. Case in point, my friend who makes a big fuss about the thread count of her sheets, the labels on her clothing, etc. She’s also a very fussy eater and has very dramatic reactions to the things she doesn’t like (“The smell of curry is absolutely overpowering. I just can’t be around it.”).
Do I roll my eyes sometimes? Sure, but it’s a heck of a lot easier–and even sometimes amusing–compared to some of the other stuff people are labelling HM.
tanookie, I don’t think you’re high-maintenance. At least, if you are, then I am, too. I’ve also got a few hang-ups, chief of which are I’m afraid of snakes (no, we don’t have many of them round here, but I’m afraid of pictures of them, cartoons of them, toy snakes and even sudden hissing noises) and lifts (would rather climb fifty flights of stairs than ride in one) and being touched (please don’t hug me).
God, I sound really weird.
Loneraven… I agree on the hugging thing! I have huge personal space requirements and hate when people infringe upon them. This was difficult for my inlaws in the beginning… they took it personally and I had to explain it wasn’t their fault. There are probably 5 people on this planet that can hug me without me cringing/fleeing.
I guess I’m pretty odd too It’s a fun club though.
My first boyfriend excelled at this. I’m another person who opened this thread out of curiosity and recognized an ex in it.
Not only did he break the speed of light making himself the dramatic focus of a conversation, but so many things ended up being all about him; we both agreed to the idea that if one of us had a problem, it was better to bring it up and discuss it than to let it fester, but every time I’d try to talk about my problems with him the conversation would end up with me talking him out of depression. Nothing that bothered me ever got resolved, until the relationship ended (messily) and I worked over it all and resolved it myself over the next month or so.
Wow, why didn’t you just write jinwicked instead, hmm?
I never considered myself high maintenance, but after reading this thread, maybe I am. I am pretty particular about how I look (and would be horrified to just ‘put on a hat’ and go out to breakfast), but I always kind of saw those things as my own personal hangups that had nothing or little to do with my relationships.:dubious:
Interesting. I always thought I was kind of easy going. The only thing I get weird about is when I feel like I’m being ignored.