Don't get me wrong. I like independent ladies. However, the repercussions of that is that they forget how to be vulnerable enough to fall in love for real.
They will not realize that their independence is causing some problems in the dynamics of being in love, unless she is that perfect lady that can be independent on the outside and professionally, but still can be empathetic and understand the need to be vulnerable enough to fall madly, deeply, in love...
Or are those notions just reserved for the movies and tv shows and music?
Is it so hard or dangerous to want to fall in love so deep than you know its either do or die? Why fall in love so safe that its only going to be lukewarm. ...
Falling in love so safe is just not worth it..
Most Helpful Girl
I think you can't be independent and deeply in love. Period.
All humans depend on one another. The only truly independent state is death.
When you love someone and your desires harmonize, no perceived feminist "independence" can matter more. The "dance of the sexes" that is created in love often implies female submissiveness, and no woman can claim independence while truthfully engaging in it. Neither can a man who exposes his heart and, his more fragile, ego before the woman. People can only ever love by tying themselves to another, to a point where that person could easily crush them into bits if they chose to do so. Only through this kind of risk and trust can be know love.
Feminists don't have issues with trust, but with the "dance of the sexes" I mentioned. That which almost always accompanies heterosexual, romantic relationships. They demonize it, shame men and women away from it, while claiming it ruins our society. It's no wonder you're under the impression feminists are afraid of loving.
Also, the word "independent" is mistaken for "strong". Female strength is not of the same nature as that of a man, nor is her independence her strength.0