Many words of admiration have been written, and spoken, about the idea of individualism, self-sufficiency, and by-extension, doing things “by oneself”. We tend to praise these attributes, because they have a semblance of strength…and, no doubt, this is true, to an extent. We praise our children when they can “do it themselves” and be trusted to be alone, and we have usually attained adulthood when one can live up to certain expectations surrounding independent-living. Furthermore, when one is sufficiently independent, they may also have the spare energy to help others.
Like many other seemingly positive characteristics though, we propose that there lies a spectrum upon which independence sits, and therefore, “too much” of it can possibly produce negative effects…like loneliness. Each of us has likely experienced that feeling, and it usually comes with negative emotions or thoughts. Too much of this, it would seem, could produce bigger downstream problems. But let us also ask, have you also felt alone, even though you had the company of others? If so, solitude or loneliness cannot simply mean ‘a lack of people’— it must mean more about the quality of interaction — the lack of depth, perhaps? So many sad stories of suicide seem to share the phrase “but they seemed fine”, and “it came as a shock.” Well, the outward appearance was a lie, or at least it was not the important part of their experience, and the person suffered great emotional strain, with no healthy outlet, we postulate.
Be that as it may, there are those who may not consider themselves candidates for this level of introspection or depth. One way to illustrate this is to highlight the “wanting” versus “needing” of meaningful social interactions. Some see it as an accomplishment to be able to say “I don’t need anyone in my life. Wanting is one thing — when it’s convenient — but I am not needy.” Perhaps they perceive this as a luxury, as being an island of independence and strength: “I don’t need, precisely because I am strong enough not to need.” And to be clear, for our purposes, this “need” is not merely for casual interactions, but, for the depth of close friendship and intimacy.
We will hope to offer a counterbalance — by proposing that this need should be viewed as something common to the human experience, with high value, and something worth addressing. Therefore, we want to say that having depth in one’s social interactions is an essential part of living well…something for which to strive, because there are benefits to having it, and negatives related to living for too long with the need unmet. And, we expect this is not obvious at first, because of popular-culture’s framing of the topic, for one.
In some circles, “need” has become a dirty word. The term seems to denote a certain level of intensity, desperation, and almost pleading. If you will, compare these phrases:
- “I need close, intimate, personal time.”
- “I can do without intimate personal time. But if I want it, I’ll get it. ”
Both reflect vastly different priorities. The first exposes a vulnerability, of sorts, while, the second is non-chalant. The first can be difficult to say…but in some ways perhaps the second can be as well— but for different reasons.
Let’s consider the ramifications of the first quote. The term “need” can denote weakness, inability, shame, a lack of talent, of maturity, or of a skill or resource within oneself...deficiencies all of them. As well, when we use the term, it is often paired with other words which only bolster the negative connotation: we “confess a need”, we “admit we need”, etc. There is skin-in-the-game, and there are consequences, usually, when a person is “in-need” and yet doesn’t get satisfied — there’s a risk, an outstanding debt, something missing within oneself.
However, depending upon how one views life and what expectations one lives by, “deficiency” may be the wrong term to use.
And, to continue the connotations associated with needing…it is said we should be able to “provide for ourselves”, be independent, and avoid admitting one is “incomplete”. However, we would submit that it depends on how far one goes with all this: relying on only oneself for everything in life just doesn’t seem practical for most people, for one. Possible perhaps, but maybe there is a common human element which makes complete indepedence something not worth having? Granted, that is a bit hyperbolic, and yet, self-reliance is not a yes/no answer. Furthermore, saying one doesn’t need intimacy at all could be seen as an extreme view…so, maybe we’re not exaggerating at all when trying to address this.
But, we may counter, “I can do it by myself” is a badge of honor, a rite of passage, and even an attribute one encounters in the part of life which some denote as “coming of age” . When you can take care of yourself (or others), you attain some level of independence, and perhaps enjoy the solitude. Granted. Chances are, we actually enjoy being the sort of people who provide for others — meet their needs. Who doesn’t enjoy seeing a loved-one beem with joy when they are presented with a gift? Who doesn’t get excited to think of others? Who doesn’t feel closer to friends and family…or, break down barriers with a stranger, when a need is met? Yes, the person may have been physically, mentally, or emotionally capable of fulfilling — to a certain extent — their own need, but, isn’t there something about the act of giving (“more blessed to give than receive” so it is said), which creates an experience which cannot be replicated whilst alone?
So now that we can imagine being the giver…whiat if we turned the tables, and asked how one would feel, if the recipient refused to accept what was offered…because they wanted to be alone, and not admit that they needed anything…because they feel strong and independent?
Well, we could feed proud of them for going it alone, of course. We could allow them the satisfaction that indeed, maybe they do have the ability to meet their own need by themselves (however better or worse than we could). We could also feel hurt, pushed-away, left-out, put in our place, and feel “un-needed”…but take heart, perhaps they will call when they merely want our company.
We should restate that we are talking about the need to have deep social interactions in life, and that being alone deters this from happening — not that we shouldn’t be able to bathe ourselves or have a career and buy our own groceries.
Let us confront ourselves with the possible fact that we are “social creatures”, and do literally need (require for proper function) intimate time with another. Surely it depends on how much, but, let’s take the most capable human being on the planet — we would propose that this person still requires closeness with people, to live a properly-functioning life.
“You complete me” became a common phrase after the movie Jerry McGuire was released. For sure, the saying was both derided and praised — mimicked endlessly though. For some, it may have hit home in deep and meaningful ways. For others, it was mocked as a sign of weakness (in the way in which the woman “needed a man”)…as it has been at least for a generation, being included in the lyrics of the band U2, “a woman needs a man, like a fish needs a bicycle”, as per the femininsts Gloria Steinem or Irina Dunn.
However, is weakness really an accurate label for stating a potential fact about human beings, and how they are supposed to function properly? We have several needs in order to live: food, air, water, sleep, etc— do these make us lesser, or pitiful, or not self-sufficient, or less-mature, or lacking of a resource which we are expected to have internally? On our best days we pay attention to the amount of food and sleep we incur, in order to maintain optimum health. We may (albeit unrealistically) complain about our need for these things, but, why classify this as weakness or negativity at all? We are actually healthier only when we identify those needs, and then provide for them.
What if intimacy is simply another one of these basic human needs…and we suffer without the proper amount?
We cannot provide for this need by being alone (or interacting superficially with others) like we can for our thirst or hunger. Just like we cannot eat the plastic apple instead of the real one — these are not “wants”, but requirements if we want to live well.
Furthermore, if we really do “need” others, then almost by definition, are we indeed “incomplete” when alone for any length of time, over a given period? Granted, people can thrive in various circumstances, however, if every single human can operate at a much higher level only with the occasional intimate company of others, then, maybe:
Intimacy with people is essential to an optimal life.
We are not saying a decent life is impossible without this intimacy. But, with all this in mind, the practice of being alone — or of remaining withdrawn — while important in some ways, can also clearly be obstacles on anyone’s path to living well. These practices hurt any chance of depth with others…they reduce interaction. Receiving what you need from others, recall, is a part of needing, a part of thriving…required. To borrow an imperfect analogy, missing a piece of a puzzle, by definition, makes the puzzle incomplete, and not optimal. Of course, many of us live sub-optimal lives, and seem to “get by just fine”. (You can identify the picture of the puzzle, perhaps, even if pieces are missing…but, why do that…and how many missing details are acceptable?) If we face the fact that we do need people in our lives, then solitude simply cannot help us fill that gap. Consider the possibility that we are missing out on something which we may not even realize…until we try and see.
To be more practical about this…“needing someone” and “feeling incomplete” seem to be indicators on our dashboard — notifications on our smartphones, to use a better analogy — that something in our life could use attention, change, improvement, satisfaction. It’s not something to ignore…and better, it’s actually a helpful indicator that balance needs to be restored, a fill-up at the gas station, if you will pardon another analogy.
What does one receive when intimacy happens? Are there not many benefits?
Increased trust in another
Emotional bonding
Physical health
Mental stability
Reduced stress
Happiness and joy and contentment
Being understood
Having a person who knows how to help, and/or how to perceive when you may need help
An increase in positivity about life
Added energy to face the struggles of life
Humility
Possible reciprocal sharing, thereby calling upon yourself to be that confidant
etc.
We can call this “having a best friend”, if the term “intimacy” is not preferred…but the relationship must involve a sharing of feelings and innermost thoughts, being deeply understood and appreciated.
<What are the risks of intimacy?>
If we want to dip our toes into this perspective, and further inquire about how to satisfy this need…we would need to change our perspective on seeing social interaction as a weakness versus an obvious requirement for well-being. We may need to consider those who accomplish this socialization as “doing it better” than we who are not. To help, this may require some analysis as to why “needing” people is viewed as a negative in the first place. Certainly we can hide behind labels and protect our vulnerabilities…real emotional hurt is a serious thing. We are selective with whom we share our feelings, and rightly so. Some do purport to “not care” or “not need”, but, is that just an excuse to remain protected, or to be seen as strong for the sake of personal pride…or heaven-forbid, both?
Or is it fear? Is your “want”, in actuality, really a “need”? Do we label it as such for fear of breaking some taboo about societal expectations? Yes, there are certainly those who will mock, or look down upon us, for showing vulnerability. But let’s say there is a connection sought between two people, and, during a close interaction, something has been discovered about the person, which literally “complements” the other — gives them strength and unity and clearly improves their life. Perhaps it’s just their increased self-discipline, to help you get out of bed when you’d really want. Perhaps it’s their messiness, to help you shine in your tidiness…perhaps it’s their strength in emotional times, which helps to bolster yours. Perhaps these opposite or more-matured attributes attract for a time, filling a need, and you grow from them…perhaps you’ll always need the complement, and both are satisfied with the mutual benefit. How can this experience be seen as anything other than strengthening — and all because a breakthrough was made? A mouth was opened in honesty, a topic was broached, and both learned to be gentle and patient enough to understand the other?
Although it may require courage, we feel that taking the initiative with the right person (or people), can expose a richness of life which many perhaps never experience. Practicing a gradual increase in openess (in order to not shock one’s social circle) could be the method of attaining a closer view of the optimal life.
For further consideration (part 2?)…drugs, depression, loneliness, and living optimally…
