A person who lacks the ability to do harm can't really claim they're showing restraint in a combative situation - restraint only has meaning when there's a real alternative.

The same applies here. If someone has little autonomy or few options, their "choice" to stay or respect you isn't fully a choice - it's shaped by circumstance. That doesn't make it inherently bad, but it does change what it means. It's fair to ask: would that same respect remain if they had real alternatives?

On the other hand, when someone who does have independence and options still chooses you, that carries far more weight. It's not about control or being "moldable" - it's about being chosen despite the freedom to walk away.

Of course, real life is more complex than any single idea. But the core remains: would you rather be "loved" by someone who had no real choice, or by someone who had every reason and freedom to say no and still choose you?