Hector wrote:
This notion seems very odd to me. When I spoke about "wants" and "needs" in school, it usually boiled down to questions of "basic human rights" which included food, water, shelter, air and sleep. I don't "need" a relationship. I don't "need" a hypothetical partner to even be a woman, much less an attractive one. But I couldn't imagine being happy or satisfied in a relationship with a man or a woman who I didn't find sexually attractive. I could only disappoint them. But it wouldn't kill me.
I think we're actually looking at it as in "what you need for the relationship to work", instead of "what you need to survive".
Nothing really needs anything without context, you don't need to survive, I don't need to exist. So yeah, the term is always applied with an attached context.