For perspective's sake, though, is the "your life revolves around your life interest" any different from any romantic comedy? I mean, a review of even some of Gaiman's work would have some very similar undertones of female vulnerability, male heroism, ect.
Every form of media focused on romance is based in large part on the premise that "my life revolves around my love". I mean, come on, from D.N Angel and Full Metal Panic to Stardust, to John Cusack's extended resume, it's all about obsession (perhaps love) being the driving force in someone's life.
True, the male-centric stories tend more toward the deed of daring do, but even that's tinged by the "manipulative *****" aspect; and if we assume that young men are just as empty-headed as young women, then the entire catalog of tropes in that genre are doing just as much harm.
How about we count it all as escapist fantasy, and assume that the readers (male and female) can distinguish between fiction and reality.
On the issue of Bella's self, sacrifice, though, it does raise an interesting question. If the roles were significantly reversed, and a guy had to harm himself/endanger his life in order to protect or aid his love interest, would we bat an eye? When Richard in the Sword of Truth series does stupid shit in order to protect Kahlan, do we consider it wrong? When Harry Dresden becomes self-destructive and retarded after the loss of his girlfriend (and, arguably, the love of his life), do we view it as self-indulgent crap, or as legitimate character development?
