Monday, December 15, 2025

The dilemma of female independence

I saw the following comment from a single woman in her 50s:

I'm independent and capable but would actually like someone to look after me, make me feel like I'm a priority.

She is caught between two things. The first is the social programming that women experience, which tells them to be, above all, independent of men. I was reminded of the force of this programming recently when talking to a female colleague. She told me that her mother's core message to her was to be independent, and that she herself had doubled down on this in raising her own daughters. She not only told them to be independent but that they didn't need a man in their lives.

However, there is also another kind of programming that we have, one embedded into our created natures. It is part of this nature for us to need, for the good of our own souls, a loving relationship with someone of the opposite sex. 

And so there is a conflict in the psyche of modern women. This conflict is not superficial because it touches on issues of formation. There is a pivotal moment in a woman's life in which she must choose between trusting a man, allowing her to release into her own feminine, receptive nature, or else relying on herself but then having to self-assert and control her environment. 

It is never an easy thing for a woman to trust, as it requires something of a leap of faith. But in modern life it is assumed anyway that the woman will aspire to become the self-assertive "boss babe" who is focused on career and autonomy and independence.

Both of the possible "pivots" that a woman can make come with potential problems. When women decide to be independent, the worst outcome is that she does not self-assert in the cool, calm manner expected of men, but that her style is a blustering one that comes across as pushy or bossy, and in which self-assertion becomes a desperate need to micro-manage and micro-control. A man who accepts a relationship with a woman like this will need vast amounts of patience to deal with it - most men will be put off. 

I don't think that this character type in women is entirely new. It is perhaps revealing that men in centuries past thought that it was most attractive for women to be demure, in the sense of being calm and settled, with composure and restraint, rather than being loud and attention-seeking. Maybe these men had seen the boss babe type in their own time and preferred something very different.

However, there are also potential negatives to women who pivot toward their feminine, receptive nature. In trusting to a man, and in being receptive, these women might develop an overly external locus of control. In other words, they will see the man as being wholly responsible for their own well-being and for their life outcomes.

This becomes especially damaging if a woman has unrealistic expectations; if she is constitutionally unhappy in life; if she is not oriented toward gratitude; or if she is not sufficiently capable in areas of life that require her own competence. 

Rejecting the mantra of independence is not supposed to mean that a woman becomes helpless or incapable, or that she does not have a moral mission that requires her to cultivate virtues and strengths of character. It is more that she feels able to lean into her husband, particularly for protection and provision, but also to provide some of the emotional stability, prudence and structure that she might not always be able to provide for herself, at least not consistently. He, for his part, will be drawn to her emotional warmth, her caring nature and the maternal qualities that she brings to the lives of his children.

It is a mistake for a woman to take independence as a goal in life. In doing so, she is less able to release into her feminine nature. She is less able to put her walls down, and to have the trust in a man that love requires. 

But a return to a vision of interdependence rather than independence won't be easy. It will mean challenging the liberal insistence on autonomy as the overriding good in life; it will mean rejecting a culture of casual relationships, which erodes trust between men and women even before a marriage has taken place; and it will mean rethinking the idea of the individual being supported within an impersonal, technocratic, universal welfare state, rather than through personal, familial relationships.