Men aren't necessities. They're luxuries.

Hear the voice of Cher, fierce and unyielding, who once declared with cutting clarity: “Men aren’t necessities. They’re luxuries.” At first her words shock, for they strike against long centuries of belief that a woman’s worth is measured by her attachment to a man. But behind the wit and boldness lies a truth both liberating and profound: that no soul, no woman, no human being, requires another to justify their existence. Love and partnership may enrich, but they do not complete what is already whole.

The heart of this saying is a declaration of independence. A necessity is something one cannot live without—like air, water, or bread. But a luxury is something that adds beauty, comfort, or delight without being essential. By naming men as luxuries, Cher does not diminish love; she elevates self-sufficiency. She calls women to see themselves not as incomplete without a partner, but as whole beings whose joy and dignity do not depend upon the presence of another. In this way, her words echo the wisdom of the ancients who taught that the first task of life is to master oneself.

Throughout history, many women were bound by the belief that men were necessities—for survival, for social status, for meaning. In ages where women were denied property, voice, or education, dependence was enforced, and marriage was not always a choice but a demand. Yet even in such times, there were those who defied the law of necessity. Cleopatra reigned with command, Elizabeth I ruled without a husband, and countless unnamed women carved out lives of resilience and autonomy, proving by their very existence that men were not indispensable, but optional companions upon life’s journey.

Cher’s words also carry a spark of humor, but it is humor sharpened by truth. For when society insists too strongly on one path, sometimes it takes bold exaggeration to break the chains. By calling men luxuries, she inverts the ancient order, reminding women to cherish themselves first. It is not that love with a man is worthless; it is that love should be chosen, not imposed, and joy should spring from freedom, not from dependence. Her saying speaks not against men, but against the bondage of needing them to feel whole.

One might see the story of Simone de Beauvoir and Jean-Paul Sartre as an illustration of this. Though deeply entwined in love and thought, de Beauvoir refused to bind her life through marriage, insisting instead on her own intellectual and personal freedom. Their relationship, rich and complex, was not about necessity but about choice. She proved by her life’s work that women are capable of being complete in themselves, and that a partner may be a luxury—adding richness—but never the foundation of identity.

The lesson here is powerful: let no one believe that their worth depends upon another. Love, when it comes, should be free, chosen from abundance rather than desperation. To treat another as a necessity is to risk despair if they are lost; to treat them as a luxury is to see them rightly—as an adornment to a life already valuable, already meaningful, already whole.

Practical is this counsel: nurture your own soul, your work, your passions, your friendships, and your dignity. If love comes, welcome it as a gift, but do not treat it as your only air. Build your foundation upon your own strength, so that whether you walk with another or alone, you stand tall, unbroken. To the women of the world, Cher’s words are not only bold—they are a shield, reminding them to live as full beings first, and lovers second.

So remember the wisdom behind the wit: “Men aren’t necessities. They’re luxuries.” Take it not as a dismissal of love, but as a call to freedom. For the one who knows they are whole without another will enter any bond not from need, but from choice—and such love, chosen freely, burns brighter and truer than love born of dependence.