On 'Needs' vs. 'Wants'

[emanix]

"Having needs doesn't make you needy. It makes you human. Just thought you should know."

A friend posted the above comment on Facebook today, and while I think I am fundamentally in agreement with the spirit of the statement, I am twitchy about the use of that particular word, 'needs', and have been for a long time. I do want to say that *wanting things* does not inherently make anyone a bad person, or needy, or whatever. To want is very definitely human. On the other hand, the word 'needs' as used to describe relationship requirements or even very important and urgent wants always gives me a little shudder because it is such a fuzzily defined term the way most people use it, and I have seen it very badly misused in the past.

Sure, everybody has needs. Food, water, shelter, basic medical care, y'know... the sorts of things that make us Not Die. But using the word 'needs' to mean 'minimum things I want in a relationship' or simply 'things I really really want right now' has always struck me as somewhat blackmailish, because it raises requirements within one particular relationship to the level of things that are non-negotiable for survival, which - and folks may certainly disagree with me here - in my opinion, they aren't. However much I might value my chosen family and the relationships I have built in and around that, the basic unit for survival is the individual, not the family, and definitely not the relationship.

Using the word 'needs' to describe any expectation or desire within a relationship seems to me to demand that a specific person (or sometimes in poly a small group of people) should meet those 'needs' whether they want to or not.

I strongly feel that romantic relationships are voluntary and therefore all aspects within those relationships should be voluntary as well (beyond the basic minimum level of respect that we should all have for our fellow human beings, of course). Not everybody has them, not everybody *should* have them. Ultimately where we are talking about the emotional aspect of a relationship, everyone is responsible for meeting their own needs or that aspect of the relationship is no longer voluntary and therefore, I would argue, neither is the relationship itself.

If I'm not able to satisfy what all of my partners *want* right now this minute, or vice versa... well, sometimes them's the breaks. We can't always expect our partners to 'perform' for us on every level. On the other hand, if I am not able to satisfy my partners minimum relationship requirements, or if they're not able to satisfy mine, logic says that we should dissolve the relationship. Whereas if the word 'needs' is used, the implication seems to be that if I am not able to satisfy my partners 'needs', I am a Bad Partner(TM) and should step up to the plate, whether doing so works for me or not.

I am probably extra sensitive to this because I had an abusive relationship in the past where my partners 'needs' were used as levers to demand more and more from me that I wasn't actually prepared to give, on the basis that *I* was a Bad and Abusive Partner(TM) if I didn't provide for them. How awful a person was I, to ignore things that were stated as NEEDS? Even if those needs effectively negated anything I might ever want out of that relationship myself, and even if those needs were things I would have stated as outside the remit of that relationship had the request been made in any other way. I was *needed*. To say no would have put me in the wrong, no matter what was being asked.

Everyone deserves to be able to ask for what they want in relationships, but every single person also deserves to set the terms of their own relationships, and not be hung out to dry if what they are able to provide is not the same as what the other person in that relationship wants, however those wants are stated.

I mean, how unreasonable would I be if I was to say "I need you not to use the word 'needs' ever again"...?

How do you folks feel about this question? Do you have different ways of defining the word 'need'? Do you love it, hate it, feel neutral about it? If you use it, what do you mean by it?

Comments

[theozzardofwiz.livejournal.com]

Um. I'd love to agree with you, but sometimes there are broken people. And I don't think I can even say any more without seriously breaching confidence and risking a life.

[redheadlass.livejournal.com]

I pretty much see it the way you do.

[thebobbu.livejournal.com]

I think the term 'needs', when used in the context of relationships, tends to be used to convey the sense of urgency and importance of a desire. The word can indeed be used to pressure people into things they don't want to do, and I completely understand your reluctance to use it yourself. But it is also an important signifier to the people one is connected to about the importance something has to your mental health. While often abused, it is nonetheless something which has a valid place in interpersonal communication.

Certainly, the need for reassurance and love is less of an essential requirement to life than the need for nutrients - but if we acknowledge that mental illness kills, then we also have to acknowledge that lack of psychological needs like a sense of security or sense of purpose can kill us too. To state that any declarations of need are invalid if they are not directly connected to ones physical well-being reduces the human existence to something entirely physical, which I think is something we can agree is not accurate to our experience of life both as and alongside human animals.

So while I agree that misuse of 'need' is endemic (no-one 'needs' a new phone or a diamond ring, for example), I do believe that the concept of non-physical needs is an important one, and cannot think of a better term to replace it which would convey the same idea with the appropriate weight.

As a solution to the word's abuse, I think that rather than attempting to remove the semantic concept from usage, a better understanding of what ones responsibilities are to ones partners should be encouraged. It is fine to ask for your needs to be met. It is also fine to refuse to meet those needs if you cannot. Having needs is not a problem - pressuring other people into fulfilling those needs when they are unwilling or unable is.

Comment from Facebook

[emanix.livejournal.com]

The friend whose thread inspired my original post had this to say, and I'm copying it here (will come back and credit when I've checked it's okay) because I think it was a great response and brought up many good points:

---
"Interesting read. I do think that needs as a word tends to be overused. However, where I think I fundamentally differ from your view is that I do view human relationships as a need. And I don't think the individual can meet their emotional needs on their own. I think we are interdependent, not independent. And that codependency is undesirable. Loneliness kills as much as tobacco and bad relationships shorten your lifespan. And the studies that cover that tends to take suicide out of the equation. We have some needs and sometimes they are different. I do think each individual has responsibility to get their needs met, but, just like our economical needs, they can't be met alone. They require others. I think the line between needs and wants is blurred. You are also allowed to want whatever you like and ask for it. The key is to have boundaries and to be responsible for your actions. If you ask for too much and are manipulative, you may hurt yourself and others."

---