Baldovin Concept censured on Facebook

(ro- for English scroll down) Baldovin Concept a fost pentru o perioada in imposibilitate de a fi publicat pe Facebook. Probabil ca unii dusmani ai sigurantei femeilor au fost deranjati de articolele scrse aici in ultimul an, si l-au raportat masiv ca spam, desi continutul sau nu contine reclame si nu vinde nimic. La rugamintile mele, dvs. cititorii ati contraraportat ca spatiu sigur care nu incalca standarderele comunitatii, pentru care va multumesc.

Eng- Baldovin Concept was for some time banned to be published on Facebook. Probably some women's security enemies were disturbed by the last year's articles I wrote here and received multiple negative spam reports to Facebook, although its content doesn’t contain advertising or any kind of commerce. But due to my asking for help, you the readers counter-reported this space as safe, not going against the Facebook Community Standards, so I thank you for that.

14 iulie 2020

4.10. The risk of the spiritual love forbidding communication by the exclusive feminine courtship initiation proposal theory

4. The feminist proposal of exclusively female courtship initiation

4.10. The risk of the spiritual love forbidding communication by the exclusive feminine courtship initiation proposal theory

Spiritual love and the Social Etiquette and Good Manners

The woman's refusal to accept any love, no matter how spiritual it might be, is both biologically and culturally justified. Firstly, according to the female sexual instinct selective principle, every woman must be protected for refusing the sexual activity or emotional approach from somebody else. Then, according to the tinny skin freedom that the civilized society promises to its citizens, every human being must be guaranteed the right not to give his body for somebody else interests. Any kind of organic social institution or group that tries to force someone’s consent, either by open means or by advanced social engineering maneuvers, commits an abuse.

The love shown to a woman is a possible way to establish a love affair with her. But the love alone, and lived more or less intensely, is not enough to form a couple with her. The famous philosopher Augustine aphorism "Love and do what you want!" is not justified anymore. Numerous nowadays examples show that the transition from the affection to the abuse can be done very easily. Casanova and Don Juan are always in love troubadours, but who leave behind emotional ruins. And the women have the normal right not to consent to their more or less sincere productions. Casanova mimics love with a few verses taken from unknown authors, with which he raises the woman on the courtship love pedestal, and then invites her to bed. Such a thing is not a spiritual love, but a very brutal, instinctual one adorned with spiritual packaging. The spiritual love is actually cased by the inhibition of this male sexual instinct raw side.

The existence of such a spiritual love feeling for a woman cannot lead to the automatic couple building with her. But, in the same way, its communication prohibition, as supported by the exclusive female courtship initiation proposal, does not seem all right either. The only exception here is, obviously, such feelings communication to a married person. This violates the universal rule of emotional isolation given by the engage / wedding ring. The explicit communication of spiritual love feelings to a person isolated from the marriage institution is a serious violation of social norms. Only in this case the exclusive female courtship initiation proposal is fully justified. We know very well that the adultery has happened in the past and is constantly happening today. The consequences of such acts can be tragic, although, in my view, the adultery is normal in some cases. There are some routine marriages that worn down beyond the point of being refreshed with sporadic flirtations. For this kind of couple relationship the best invigoration is the very divorce. But I think that the divorce decision must come directly from the members of the married couple, without the influence of third parties. In this case, the prior to courtship rules must be changed to a minimum male action.

But if the woman is not engaged in a stable relationship, then the spiritual love communication to her should not be forbidden. As I said in the previous article, on the one hand, communicating it violates the courtship 3rd prior stage deductible from the Social Etiquette and Good Manners. Indeed, these feelings communication conflicts the discretion principle, expressed in this article . But, on the other hand, such behavior strengthens its principles, raising the beloved woman above its own person. So, in principle, the Social Etiquette and Good Manners are not violated, but strengthened in its purposes. Even if the love is not spiritual enough, its communication should not be forbidden. I have shown in this article why there are not enough legal arguments for such a thing. Violation of the 3rd prior rule to courtship is a lack of Good Manners gesture, but such a thing cannot be punishable by law.

The exclusive female courtship initiation proposal came either from a too emotional mentality or from a too mercantile one.

The main argument for ruling the exclusive female courtship initiation as a new social norm is that it would stop the sexual crimes and the emotional abuses. If banning its communication would put an end to them, then this proposal would be justified. But I showed in this article , such a measure does not solve these problems, according to its stated role. Even if it was not clear enough, the Social Etiquette and Good Manners had already banned them before, but without success. Another rule like this would not be more successful than this Social Etiquette generally used by the society’s upper classes. In addition to this failure, banning this feeling in one way or another is an attack on human spirituality itself. Prohibiting these feelings expression, by more or less practical means, is a rigidity gesture, at the opposite extreme.

The love invariably comes with a bigger or smaller dose of suffering. Love is generally a painful game, from an emotional point of view. Scarred hearts inevitably remain behind. And this not necessarily happens because of the particular social group tendency to increase the freedoms that eventually abuse the others. Love in general is a hoax of nature itself to make us perpetuate the species. After the reproductive instinct is satisfied and the offspring has matured, the love with which he is adorned disappears. Love is a game of chance that everyone accepts or rejects according to their personal emotional pattern. This option should not be a subject of any institution intervention. On the one hand, its wounds have always been the most painful throughout the history, and some of the elderly do not want to repeat them. But, on the other hand, the happiness it produces is unmatched. Most of people, whether men or women, are willing to accept this risk in order to gain an unforgettable experience. For everyone, the exclusive female courtship initiation proposal is a restrictive one.

There are women who accept this proposal precisely because of the love suffering they had. Some radical feminists themselves have radicalized themselves precisely because of the consecutive getting through these states of maximum happiness followed by cruel disappointment. The exclusive female courtship initiation proposal makes sense for them according to the idiom "keep the road!", meaning never. These fears from a new suffering bring with them a real moral stoicism in some women. Hence their slipping into the opposite extreme, arguing that the spiritual love should be blamed as inauthentic or even incriminated as a predisposition to abuse. But it will never be eliminated by a few legislative restrictions or by changing the good manners. Of course, following the analogy, the happiness produced by love will not also ever be oversized nor reduced by such social norms.

But a lot of radical feminists women (and even men who support their ideas) don't know that. They have experienced a deformed maternal attachment in their families and cannot apply it harmoniously in love relationships at the level of adult women. This feeling communicating prohibition in principle a priori excludes the existence of its sincerity, according to the radical feminism prejudices about the men "disgusting nature". Despite Casanova-type simulators, there are men who live these feelings. The proposal in question is based on a false (sometimes hypocritical) premise that such a thing would not exist. There are some women who do not know this and do not want to know it, because they are not interested in heterosexual relationships and do not give a man a chance to communicate it from the very beginning. But both the histrionic-seducers and the disguised prostitutes know it very well. They even seek to hook it out and histrionic-emotionally or financially exploit it. It is sad that they cannot live the inestimable feeling that such a thing presupposes and are blinded by the psychopathological counteracting symptoms and the mercantile interests.

From the first moment I heard of their proposal, I was struck by its mercantile character. Indeed, if we think only about the crimes and the emotional abuse against women, the mercantile prohibition of any male courtship initiation, whether discreet or explicit, would be justified. But in the face of such a spiritual feeling, it looks like the meeting between an eccentric philosopher/artist with the authorities in dictatorial societies. Whether it is called consent for greeting or compliment, or exclusively feminine courtship initiation, such an idea hints at a commercial exchange mentality: you give me something to accept you do this to me or I do that to you. Yes, the economic exchange has brought a higher level of humanization in the human society, as opposed to the warlike culture of robbery. If we compare it with the primitive and classical period, the industrial exchange is more human. But sex and love in general need more than a negotiation between "I do this for you" and "you do that to me."

The economic exchange mentality is far too bureaucratic and too impersonal for what should be an emotional relationship between two people. And I'm sorry for those who haven't experienced this in their families since they were very young. I think they have lost much more than such of this new politeness rule implementation could ever give them. The psychoanalysis described in detail the too much maternal attachment problems. So it is an example of the emotional imbalance due to too much detachment from the mother, either through negligence or by a too strong maternal attachment counteracting. People generally complain of "confusion" in the face of a situation, but in this case the (maternal) complex in the normal dose is good for strengthening the emotional relationships.

The exclusively female initiation of courtship proposal in relation to the culture

Moreover, the very traditional culture of love itself is recently confronted with a new type of iconoclasm under these too radical norms. At the cultural elite’s level, there were sporadically such feelings of cultural rebellion. The (proper) Ionoclasm of the Byzantine or the early twentieth century modernism era, were such radical moments in the history of culture. But this kind of radical rejection of tradition was only a passing step. Tradition has been and will be an important part of culture, so it cannot be radically erased with a sponge. Returning to forgotten forms (once called "postmodernism") was a constant solution after a trend or mentality become obsolete and had exhausted its forms of expression.

There are indeed situations in which certain gestures in traditional culture are dubious about the social norms of courtship. For example, the scene of the prince who brings "Snow White" back to life, in that famous fairy tale, has a meaning for traditional culture; as a royal figure, the prince's gesture was not only not inappropriate towards the lower classes female character, but even desirable for the traditional mentality, according to the prior to the courtship 4th rule . Nowadays the dream of accessing a higher social class through marriage is no longer so exciting. Although most women would still consider this gesture lucky, there are enough who would not accept to be kissed by a stranger, whatever a prince he might be.

But this situation of contemporary social norms flagrant violation is rare. The important traditional culture anticipates today's normalcy. That is why it is still an important part of human history. Next I will expose a short list with several universal art works that have situations in which the rules and stages prior to courtship are flagrantly violated. Here are some examples from the literature:

William Shakespeare: “Antony and Cleopatra”
“Romeo and Juliet”

Johann.W. Goethe: “The Sorrows of Young Werther”

Famous songs in which the first contact initiation by the man was used are the following:

Elvis Presley: "The lady loves me"
"The Girl of My Best Friend"
"Fort Lauderdale Chamber of Commerce"

Beatles : „Hey Jude” 
"Come together!"

The Doors: "Alabama Song"

Guns 'N Roses: " Sweet child of mine"

Queen: "Crazy Little Thing Called Love"
"In Only Seven Days"
"You Take My Breath Away"

Michael Jackson: "Human nature"
"The way you make me feel"

All these risk to be excluded from culture or to be blamed for containing the courtship initiative by male characters.

There are arguments that come from the nihilistic area of the philosophy of culture that criticizes civilization's preference for spiritual (fantasy) love while it also condemns the (concrete) rape. These arguments are meant to show how civilization perverts the nature of instinct to become phantasmic, transforming the individual into an entity torn from the reality of life. Although they do not clearly support the practice of rape, they still consider it more coherent than the lie of overestimating the loved one to the rank of deity. There are probably certain radical feminists who come up with this kind of argument, although I haven't found them anywhere. However, most of them do not refer to this type of philosophical nihilism, but to the sociological factor of spiritual love as the universal way to rape. The refusal to accept it as a social norm outside of the expression consent comes from the assumption that it universally turn into a sexual crime. However, the biological argument is stronger than the anarchist one: it is not society that "perverts" the instinct, but the selective female sexual instinct itself that takes only one thing from the masculine one. So we are not talking about a conflict between the civilization and the instinct but about that between the two forms of the same instinct, as split into feminine and masculine.

The Western civilization is full of lonely people, some of them parents, both men and women. My opinion is that if we weigh the risks of abuse from a Casanova man with the loneliness pain, then it is worth the risk. The rigidity towards male courtship initiation avoids the emotional abuse at the age of 35-40. At that time, a large part of women adopt a feminist vision regarding the love relationships initiation, without necessarily becoming de facto militants. But, at the same time, at this age and on this mentality, couples also disappear. The result is an accentuation of the couple's life destruction that is already affected by the corporate mentality. The chances of such a mentality to be avoided by men and fail to start a couple are very high. Many feminists understand and accept this. Because of this, there was a conflict between radical and moderate feminism on this topic, which I will detail in the next article .

20 iunie 2020

4.9. The exclusive feminine courtship initiation proposal according to the human psycho-affective nature

4. The feminist proposal of exclusively female courtship initiation

4.9. The exclusive feminine courtship initiation proposal according to the human psycho-affective nature

a) The conflict between the ancestral and the civilized form of the sexual instinct

At the basic level of sexual instinct in the animal world, the courtship 3rd stage during the rut period does not mean an absolute refusal of mating. The female categorical refusal to mate in the animal world occurs only when the maternity overlaps the male's rut period, according to the seasons cycle. This is the bear motherhood case that lasts about 18 months. The female cannot accept mating as she is nursing, because the gestation would affect the development of the already existing off-springs. Although the female bear is smaller than the male, she can be very aggressive when a male tries to approach her. The same happens with lions. As long as is breastfeeding, the female does not get in the rut and is not interested in mating. But if the pride is taken over by other males, they first kill the babies so that the females re-enter the heat, and only then can mate with them.

During the rut, the female's refusal is only temporary. It is only a delay until the female right time ovulation or the male warming up to reaching the peak of fitness. The dominant male is the only one who decides the categorical refusal of mating during the rut period for the lower males. The female can also mate with an inferior male if the dominant male allows it or is skilled enough to escape his horns. This is what happens in the octopus, where a physically inferior male cheats on the dominant one, taking on the appearance of a female about to enter the heat. The dominant one tolerates him around females, believing that he is a female; but in a moment of inattention from the dominant one, the inferior one quickly changes his pigmentation and mates with one of the females. Also, some males of the Garter species of snakes secrete female pheromones to steal the heat of other males, who even take it as a female and try to mate with. Although there is no dominant male in this species, the competition is high and only the ones with bigger physical abilities mate. This trick of taking the heat from others gives these deceptive males a better chance of mating with numerically inferior females.

In humans, things are more complicated. First of all there is no mating season, so the human species can mate all year round. Then, the human possesses lethal weapons, which excludes the fight between males for domination over females, according to the free fight hierarchies from the animal world. The strongest human male can be defeated by the weakest, by trickery or ambush. Therefore, there is no dominant man to prevent a woman from mating with an inferior one, if she desires to. There is competition between men in different fields, which bring popularity to the most skilled ones and so they have access to the most desired / attractive women. But the certain one superiority does not imply the exclusion of others from the spectrum of women available for mating. With a few exceptions, the dominant men are limited to one partner, so there are other women remaining for those at the hierarchy bottom. Thus, in the human civilization there rarely have been wars for the women conquest. Usually the wars have been created and are still being created for resources and other such interests. (I have changed my mind after the documentary "The international politics sadism", in which I showed that most wars were created out of murderous and social sadistic interests)

The civilization has brought to the female sexual instinct this new role of categorically rejecting the male advances that the woman considers inferior. Every organization forms of the human society have come to support this new role of women, condemning the rape. But, this instinct over-ornamentation came into the conflict with both its ancestral form and the prior to courtship norms existing in different communities, as described here and here . Then, the ancestral male sexual instinct does not respond to the simple female (cultural) rejection. Of course, the society will never allow it to act freely, without restrictions. Following this rule, the well-known feminist slogan "no mean no" is totally right and justified. No man should continue courting or making approaches to a woman who shows no clear interest in such a thing.

b) The categorical refusal of the female sexual instinct to mate in human culture

The punishments applied by the society for violating these norms inhibit the male sexual (instinctual) drive to go beyond the woman's consent and go to rape. But if it is prohibited in the external action, this does not mean that it would be somehow also forbidden at the deep level of the instinctual root. The psychological reality has shown that the external inhibition of a drive does not lead to its eradication from the desire vectors field. Due to the fact that the (instinctual) sexual drive is older and stronger than these civilization norms, it remains active. Even if it is controlled by these rules, still it latently waits for a moment of these psychic guards relaxation so to come to the surface. And, as these impulses are repressed, they accumulate energy and strike harder in these guards of civilization embedded in the human mind.

The male sexual instinct, both human and animal, responds by drive contracting only to the conflict with the traumatic complex caused by the opponent's beating. But the beating between males can only temporarily temper the sexual drive. That is why the instinctual prohibition is only temporary. If is not killed or disabled after fighting, in the end the defeated male will take revenge on the rival. But such a thing cannot be accepted in human civilization. The human male attempt to get closer to a woman can no longer be stopped according to the wild model from the animal world, namely through violence before the actual committing a criminal act. This primitive type of resolving such conflicts can no longer be used in the rule of law human society *. A violent response of any authority to a discreet or explicit courtship initiation is unjustifiable, as I have shown here. Therefore, the inhibited by social norms sexual instinct will constantly press for camouflaged or formally modified expressions, according to the model described by the psychoanalysis.

On this psycho-instinctual confusion model there was also overlapped the modern civilization mobility phenomenon. The prospect of relocation has led to either the couples’s separation or to the women additional refusal to engage in a love relationship with men from the social backgrounds they want to leave. Such a thing brought an extra problem. In the past, the people rarely left their communities. So the life partner was chosen from a limited spectrum of potential partners. The contemporary lifestyle, with its mobility and ideals planted in the common person soul, made the potential partners to want more than a typical relationship in that community. If someone wants to climb the social ladder and get to a different place than the one is currently living in, then that person is less willing to enter into a relationship specific to that community. Both the woman and the man in this situation communicate the natural willingness to enter into a relationship, in one way or another. But their ideals are higher than those seen in the relationship with the suitors in the immediate environment, so they do not accept the construction of relationships with them. So the original interests’ discrepancy between the male and female sexual instinct was doubled by these far too high ideals that the individual has about the couple idea.

c) The binary logic Yes / No in front of the complex logic of the sexual instinct

I have shown in the previous articles that the return to the basic principles of Social Etiquette and Good Manners , found in the rules and courtship prior stages, can solve many of the emotional abuses contemporary problems. But they have a weak point, which makes them fail in their goal. According to the ancestral instinct dynamics (consolidated in the animal world), this external inhibition can be bypassed by the increasingly stronger drive. This instinctual overexcitation can find a crack in the social norms barricade that inhibits it. This weak point is the courtship prior 3rd stage that refers to the woman’s uncertainty . This rule encourages the sexual drive expression in a sublimated way, through the spiritual love. So, given the pressure, it finds a way out here.

For the human female sexual instinct, the 3rd stage prior to courtship is decisive and can make the difference between mating or not. But, in the absence of physically, morally or socially superior suitors, this stage tends to provide opposite signals to the refusal in the same time. This signal ambivalence is specific to the female sexual instinct dynamics. It does not originate in the histrionic psychopathological layer, although it can amplify it, according to its affective-behavioral landmarks. But the contradictory signal to the opposite sex people is part of the female sexual instinct, as it has strengthened over the millions of years of evolution. In predators, we observe the female in heat aggressive behavior towards the male attracted by the pheromones released by her. The human female sexual instinct is not far from issuing such contradictory messages.

Therefore, everything that a woman declares about love or sexual partner must be taken also in the negative sense. Those structured with an analytical, logical mind (most often men, but also women) cannot understand this. Hence the famous jokes about the man's inability to understand the woman's desires. Women, in turn, joke about male unilateralism in interpreting female signals, and blame it on male sexual obtuseness. Ignoring the negative signals in female ambivalent messages is specific to the binary logic Yes / No, specific to the male practical mentality. But both the male instinct and the psyche emit contradictory, self-regulatory signals. The pressure of an already repressed libido, (but not annihilated, and that is why it has become so strong) finds its expression through this courtship prior 3rd stage. From the feminine emitting ambivalent signs, the male sexual instinct and mind pay attention only to the positive ones, even if they are weaker. The woman's categorical refusal to accept courtship is interpreted by the male sexual instinct as an invitation to step up to his best version.

The man thus creates his own positive reality, perceiving only this permissive side of the ambivalent messages emitted by the female sexual instinct. Here both the instinct and psychic take the helm of judgment just like a psychosis, creating their own fantasies. Despite the woman's rejection signs, regardless of whether there are acceptance signs in the same time, the male judgment pressed by a strong libido will perceive only the positive ones. The more categorically is her refusal to accept such a relationship, the more suitors’ perception naturally perceive it as part of the stage 3 specific flirtation. That is why feminism has strongly insisted that "no mean no", counteracting its own positive signals manifested in the same time. This accelerated self-regulation of contradictory signals causes the “no mean no” tautology to turn into “no mean no, that is, no”, as the vehemence of the refusal is doubled by ambivalent and more obvious positive signals.

For the binary (mathematics) logic these signals exclude each other meaninglessly. But for the main interest of the female sexual instinct, the logic of these contradictory signals is perfectly justifiable. It is supported by the 3rd stage preceding the courtship and has the role of selecting the best genes of the male in the best shape. Its purpose is to give the off-spring the best possible chance of survival and development of the species. The instinct seems primitive but it is actually much more evolved by the binary logic devices. It cannot be reduced to a computing machine that works with values such as "true" or "false" **.

Both the men and women consider the affective-behavioral oddity specific to each one of them to be natural because everyone feels it that way in their nature. Each ignores his own distorted perception of his own desires and judges those of the opposite sex according to this binary logic reductionism criterion. Accused of ambivalence from outside or by their own logical-binary perception, women express more the negative signals given to the rejected man. According to the same binary logic biases, men also ignore the female negative signals due to the instinct blinding pressure that seeks satisfaction loopholes. This instinctual pressure manifests also in women themselves through signals out of the refusal vehemence control. And both of them, however, lose sight of the very complex psychic dynamics, much more complex than the contemporary machines.

We cannot accept the free manifestation of the sexual instinct that would lead to rape, but also it cannot be suddenly stopped with a repeated obsessive "no". And this is exactly what the exclusive female courtship initiation theory tries to do. In the same way, the feminine "yes" does not always mean "yes". For the human understanding of this moment of civilization, the sexual instinct seems to be an ambivalent psychopathological entity in communication and behavior. Only the fact that it brought us here must convince us that it has a certain strategy. The sexual instinct determines a very sophisticated behavior meant to achieve its primary goal, namely the best performing genes selection for reproduction and the maximum chances of survival of the new generation and the species.

d. Dinamica psiho-afectiva a dragostei spirituale

This conflict between the social norms and the instinct, or between the instinct itself contradictory impulses, is a generator of culture and the wide psychical content, according to the psychic phenomenon of sublimation described by the psychoanalysis. Like a predator stimulated by the prey running to pursue it, so is the rejected man by a woman stimulated to show even more and to impress her in order to form a couple with her. The secret passion for inaccessible people, the impossible loves, happen even today, after these rules have become more flexible. The weak men grossly break these rules and go down to rape when they can. But the most intellectually and spiritually gifted use a different kind of these norms violation, namely in a cultural and phantasmal way.

The courtship rules or its prior ones are meant to protect welded couples, or to prohibit the omega-type human males from having access to women above their social status, in accordance with the very principle of sexual instinct selectivity. In fact, this characteristic is specific to the sexual instinct of those well placed on the social scale. For those at the base of the social pyramid, the instinct commands them to do the exact opposite, namely to try to court a person from a higher social layer. Such behavior occurs according to the stages of the getting closer between the sexes in the sense of mating, as they have been consolidated since the animal world. But those from the upper classes were not entirely immune to the experience of violating these norms that their very own social class instituted. In past times anyone could get into this misfortunate situation of losing the partner. The numerous diseases and wars have constantly led to this. The external social rules regarding courtship worked for a while but the sexual instinct was sometimes stronger and broke them.

Such a feeling of intense love has the general disadvantage that it really violates the principles of traditional staging prior to courtship, being too explicit in the second stage . I described in that article the risks of ignoring these steps. It could even violate the clearly stated rules in the community, such as the engagement or the wedding ring. This is a much clearer rule for all the society members than the principles of Social Etiquette and Good Manners. This institution manages to communicate the fact that the person is in a stable relationship and this relationship is protected by the rules and the rest of the every society institutions. But, in some cases, the engagement or the wedding ring on one person’s finger that is a crush to someone actually sustains this fire more than extinguish it. The attempting to court someone against these rules will bring problems because these social institutions are being attacked. And through them is attacked the very foundation of the society.

But on the other hand, it sincerely elevates the loved one far above any other person. The stronger the passion for the loved one, the more the sublimated sexual instinct unites with the maternal one (anaclisis) and its adjacent complexes. And the more such drives absorb the sexuality proximity, the more the love becomes a personal religion to the one who goes through this experience. Strangely, trough such states usually go people who do not consent to the state-recognized traditional religious institutions. On the contrary, the more faithful a person is according to these institutions principles the lower is the sublimation to a potential sexual partner. It can be said that the parental image is more coherently projected in the person of an immutable entity (God) than in a concrete person, has bad habits and vices. Mircea Eliade very clear described this "atheism", which creates its own religion out of the mercantile things. But precisely for this reason it is more a traditionalist nihilism rather than a genuine atheism in the true sense of the word.

From this point of view, this feeling not only does not violate one of the principles of Social Etiquette and Good Manners (putting the other one above), but also becomes a model for this way of relating to someone. Well, the society not only accepts such a thing, but it intentionally seeks it. Everyone wants such an assessment from someone. The intensity of this feeling makes it desirable for women who have not had such an experience. The stories love also brings certain risks such as those described by me here . But most women are willing to take the risks of breaking the prior to courtship rules and stages, like the teenagers who jump on them in a hurry to live something like this as soon as possible.

Most feminists (including some radicals ) do not want to forbid such explicit feelings expression when they are genuine. The problem is the authenticity criteria according to which they decide which are authentic and which are not. This feeling long-term instability also contributes to this uncertainty, even if it is sincere and lived with maximum intensity. Whether it derives in a love affair or not, the spiritual love ends after a certain period, either of pain or satisfaction. In the first case, it turns into "the never again” lesson, as an unrequited love causes more suffering than happiness. In the other case it turns into habit and sometimes later even boredom. The communication weakening in the first case and the love intensity decrease also cause suffering to the woman, not only to the rejected man. That is why some women doubt its original authenticity.

I found few debates among feminists on this topic because it is very difficult to reach a common ground. There are some feminists who agree to forbid communication the spiritual love feelings on the grounds that it would cause discomfort according to this lack of discretion in expression that violates what I called the second pre-rule of courtship. At this point, the feminism turns into an ultra-radical phase, which conflicts not only with moderate feminism but also with radical one as well. The disguised prostitutes, the histrionic women and the lesbians who engage in such militancy (I repeat, not all of these social categories are feminists) relate differently to the spiritual love signs.

For the disguised prostitutes, a man who falls in love with them in this way is desirable, because he increases their "value" on the love market in the eyes of potential customers. If he is rich, then he himself becomes the "meaning of life." For the histrionic women, such a man in love with their soul is desirable, because he fuels their narcissism. But the story lasts only until he gives clearer signs that he wants a sexual relationship. And then, usually, things get a little more complicated, because the histrionics might show hostility to the courtship explicit signs. Some men keep their passion but others quickly lose interest. And this stimulates an abandon feeling that the histrionics can manifest by maximum hostility towards former admirer in different social contexts. At this passion evolution point, they support the ultra-radical theory of forbidding the spiritual love feelings communication. But if another man in love with them appears on the horizon, they changes his perspective again, and even poses for a special love relationship beginning just to humiliate the first one… For the lesbians, a man that is spiritually in love with them can give them a certain sense of satisfaction. But they also do not respond positively to his explicit signals in the sense of building a love affair, for reasons of sexual orientation. And, they dislike it also when he stops showing interest. That is why there is no unanimity on this issue. Some feminists oscillate between accepting and forbidding the unsolicited spiritual love feelings communication. About those who vehemently maintain their position in banning this communication according to the exclusive female courtship initiation theory I will write in more detail in the next article .

* In the interest of forbidding the male courtship initiation we can foresee a very basic female sexual instinct desire to see two males establishing the hierarchy, before giving her consent for mating to the strongest.

** As objects that work on their own, these devices look like miracles, as their creators look like gods. But – let's not forget! – our seemingly advanced technology has not yet managed to create a common dragonfly wing.

15 mai 2020

4.8. The political inopportuneness of the exclusive female courtship initiation proposal

4. The feminist proposal of exclusively female courtship initiation

4.8. The political inopportuneness of the exclusive female courtship initiation proposal

a. The social norms inefficiency for the crimes and emotional abuses on women prevention

The traditional Social Etiquette and Good Manners is enough to totally stop crimes and emotional abuses against women. Its main characteristic is the self diminishing for the other one favor, and focusing on its needs. If its spirit is applied in the pre-courtship period , then there will be no more rapes or Casanova abuses. Of course, its main problem is that its rules are constantly being violated in a concrete level. Well, the female courtship initiation proposal will not be able to stop the crimes and emotional abuses against women, as the old ones in this Social Etiquette and Good Manners did not. It is not effective by itself, as I have already shown here  .

For the time being, it works partially in the universities or the upper class educated world. It temporarily discourages the potential Casanova-type abusers, who have accidentally arrived from other backgrounds. If having a high class entourage, then the abusive and criminal tendencies men are encouraged to rise up to the same level and behave according to these mannered rules. These abusers cannot apply their street-specific tricks in a populated university environment because any such behavior is ignored and even condemned. But that doesn't work at all. Where there is no such social environment, those undereducated in this way give up good manners, and commit emotional abuses and sexual crimes, according to the environment in which they were formed.

Both the Casanova-type abuses and the rapes take place when the community is not present to collectively disapprove them. The rapes occur on most university campuses, despite its collective implementation. From this example we can see that the women are safe in a populated environment, where they felt safe anyway even before of this potential new rule implementation. I showed in this article  or in this one the fact that banning the peaceful courtship man initiation towards a woman will not solve the problem of sexual harassment and rape. Those who commit these crimes violate the existing laws, as well as the existing courtship rules from the Social Etiquette and Good Manners. So they will not stop violating this new potential rule, as do not care about the old ones. So, even if this new rule would be implemented in the whole society, it would still not work, just as the Social Etiquette and Good Manners were not adopted on in the marginal environments.

b. The uselessness of the exclusive female courtship initiation norm for the dominant women

In addition to the ineffectiveness of such a new "good manners" rule in preventing the crimes and emotional abuses against women, it is also useless for women who actually put it into practice. The female role in the dynamics of couple formation has been partially implemented with the modern era, which has given women independence as they have got equal rights to men. Some of them accepted it, taking seriously the very active role in society. Others have proven superior to most men, including in areas traditionally devoted to men. This is the case of liberal women, entrepreneurs, with a dominant personality. Such women existed in all the history recorded ages. It can be understood that these women control and decide the couple as well as the environment in which they live. Some of them even decide the future of their community. The exclusive female courtship initiation is typical for such a woman, as it is the very initiative of a better administration of the field in which she works. Due to their organizational power, these women are highly respected by the community and society.

The moderate feminism gave them as an example and took them as a model for justifying the equal rights between men and women. The radical feminism went further and set an example to demonstrate an illusory gender superiority of women over men. However, the truly dominant woman type described above is rare, though very visible. Most women have retained their selective-receptive status, according to the natural feminine constitution. The Marxist matriarchy theory, according to which the women held the political power and control over the formation of couples, was refuted by subsequent studies of cultural anthropology. The matrilineal totem rules, described by Levi Strauss* and other anthropologists, used in tribal societies, was meant to avoid the incest by forbidding marriages between members of the same totemic sign. The matrilineal transmission of the totemic sign was meant to forbid mainly the sexual relations both between parents and children and also between the brothers and sisters. The women image in the primitive artistic productions had this explanation and not the reflection of any female political superpower, as Marx believed. The theory that women played a more active political role than men in the stages of human evolution is a mistake.

c. The exclusive feminine courtship initiation theory conflict with the very nature of femininity

In addition to its main purpose inefficiency for which would be implemented in society, the exclusive female courtship initiation proposal brings a disadvantage to the traditional mentality. It firstly tends to limit the conservatives' way of building love relationships. Except for the dominant woman described above, the exclusive female courtship initiation proposal comes as an extra burden for the conservative mentality, or for a socially inexperienced young woman. It affects the attractive and selective instinctive role of the femininity. Such a permutation that some feminists are trying at this time of civilization has no chance of success because there are many women themselves who do not accept it. Not all women who embrace this proposal want a more active role in the couple's dynamics.

I showed in this article that in the mammals male has a slightly more active role in courtship, while the female has a selective- receptive one. In the same way, in the traditional human culture, it was the man who initiated a relationship that could end in marriage. Although there have been and still are few exceptions, the general rule is that the woman is attractive and waits, as the man is the one who likes and approaches her. As in the animal world, basically the human male has a somewhat more active role in the courtship dynamics. The human female is receptive or refractory to the proposal coming from the male. It is natural for a man to discreetly initiate courtship a woman and advance with it as he receives signals that she is interested in such a thing. In the civilization advanced degree societies, the man was the one who signaled more or less explicit interest in courtship, and the woman either responded positively through equally explicit signs, or negatively, through the disinterest signs. Excluding the traditional courtship behavior rules and replacing them with a single one, specific to dominant women, is an attack on the natural human sexuality and affectivity.

There are women who like to be complimented by unknown men in the populated public space. The street compliments do not annoy them like they do to the feminist omen. On the contrary, such a thing temporarily revives for many women the femininity that has become more or less flattened in a routine sexual relationship. Some show satisfaction with such a thing, and others hide it. This gesture is caused by the fact that they do not want to leave the relationship that are in or do not want a relationship with the one who approached them. They consider that, if they show their satisfaction, then the courtship initiator could wrongly understand that he has received the consent to continue it. That's why some women prefer not to show that they like the street compliments.

The young and teenager boys approach unknown girls on a regular basis to initiate emotional relationships. The songs videos that are broadcast by the specialized in dance music channels abound in situations in which the unknown and boy and girl "urgently" approach each other emotionally, guided by the inspiration of rhythms. I also mentioned that the lack of time or the economic migrations specific to the contemporary lifestyle made these rules to be ignored. Despite love failures with the Casanova men or with people who practice the disguised prostitution  (both men and women), many couples started after the courtship initiation without regard to these rules. It is very risky and those concerned would better adjust to these social norms for they own protection against the abuses. They have been culturally designed to help them find a more suitable partner. But if these people choose this kind of minimal courtship, that’s their choice and they cannot be forced to civilize.

d. The meaning of the exclusive female courtship initiation proposal for the different social groups that adhere to it

The exclusive female courtship initiation measure is perceived differently by the various social groups that adhere to it. Each of them understands different side of it, or follows something else from it, depending on its own group specific mentality. Most of the groups that adhere to this proposal are totally satisfied with the Social Etiquette and Good Manners. These traditional high manners rules can more effectively replace the female courtship initiation social purpose. They consistently promoted the love relationships construction in the spirit of patience, attention and obedience to the partner within the courtship and the marriage. If something like this is extrapolated to the before courtship period, then the too explicit messages discomfort problems that some women feel would disappear. Unfortunately, these rules have not been promoted throughout the entire social body. Some of its norms are outdated by the contemporary egalitarian spirit of the sexes. Then they remained elected only for the upper classes. These courtship rules are still unknown for the most contemporaries, as they have humble condition. In the absence of clear regulations provided by a proper courtship education, many women feel represented by this new proposal. A search for these rules on the internet or in the library can temper this feminism need for an anti-traditionalist revolution with this new norm.

There are legitimate women interests for not being disturbed by too many courtship initiation attempts. The very beautiful women, the media stars and other celebrities, including men, are negatively affected by an excessive influx of suitors and admirers who constantly bother them with courtship initiation proposals. The common women want a greater role in the couple formation dynamics, according with the contemporary egalitarian ideas and against the traditional woman obedience towards man. They do not necessarily want the burden responsibility of the relationship building through female exclusive initiation, but only to have the freedom to choose the right partner, without being disturbed by others. But both the Social Etiquette and Good Manners, as the preliminary stages regarding courtship that I wrote about in this article , suit them much better.

There are married women who adhere to this female courtship initiation ideology because their sexual appetite is lower than their husbands. As mentioned above in this study , they want sexual acts to be rarer, according to their own appetite. But they do not have the courage to seriously discuss this with their husbands, or they are afraid of unpleasant consequences such as the cooling of the relationship or even divorce. So, as an alternative, they believe that such a measure could indirectly favor them on this issue. Then, the couple contented women, the anxious ones, the lesbians and the luxury prostitutes do not want to be assaulted at all with explicit the courtship initiation messages from men. The first ones don't want it because they really don't want anything else. The anxious women do not want such messages because they are frightened by the prospect of rape or other emotional abuse. The lesbians do not have a heterosexual orientation, so they are not interested in such a thing. And the luxury prostitutes do not want wealthy men to know that they have such a job, and that they mimic the affection and passion that "arose" for them. They seek to facilitate the greatest possible financial interests through these relationships and do not want to be approached by the medium financial potential men; playing the divas role, they want to fool the very wealthy men who do not see their tricks. In the same way the histrionic women want a libidinal-seductive interests facilitation out of this new rule. For them, the seduction and the seduced one abandonment has a function of mental orgasm, as I have described in detail here

We notice that under this norm apparent legitimacy, the last two social groups also hide certain women obscure interests. For the disguised prostitutes this rule ensures a financial interest based on lies. For the histrionic women, it covers their insatiable need for scandal. The Social Etiquette and Good Manners applied during the preceding courtship period can rebalance things. The honest women can appeal to it. Both the preceding courtship rules and stages are already affirmed by the Social Etiquette and Good Manners. These traditional rules are enough to address the new gender issues in the contemporary society. So I end this article in the same state in which I ended the previous one , sending both men and women to self-education and taking on the traditional rules of courtship. They may be old and totally unacceptable, but they have the advantage of being consolidated for over a thousand years, at a time when the sexes socialization was not conditioned by the lack of time as today.

The radical feminists (but also the moderate ones who sometimes tend to support their ideas) must learn that these rules violation by the street courtship initiators does not justify an offensive response from them, as cannot be legally criminalized. Those good manners lacking have never been condemned in history, but only ignored. The exception was the lack of polite behavior towards the royal family members that could bring one plebeian’s end faster. But this is no longer the case today. Moreover, I bet that the radical feminists are not part of any royal family, despite (or because of) their histrionic narcissism… The insult that some of them respond to such an explicit courtship initiator is as unmannered as his preceding courtship rules violation. In this case, it is difficult to ask someone not to deviate from the good manners in regard to you as you do not do it yourself and use demeaning behaviors, gestures and words.

On the other hand, the men must learn to naturally use these rules, just like the mammal world males, without the coercion means specific to the classical or even the contemporary society! The success of the pairing depends on the result, not on their violation. Once this stage is completed, things can adjust by themselves, as they did in the classical balanced societies. An exception to this rule is given by the poetic minds that violate these rules for spiritual purposes. The exclusive female courtship initiation proposal also conflicts with them, as I will show in the next article.

* Levi Strauss – The Savage Mind

19 aprilie 2020

4.7. c. Approaching an unknown woman in the public space: the worst place for men to initiate courtship

4.7. c. Approaching an unknown woman in the public space: the worst place for men to initiate courtship

Further on, I will analyze the fault coming from the other side, the masculine one, by too explicit signaling to initiate the courtship. This is the explicit approach on the street or through social networks. It creates discomfort for most women. For a long time I thought that this discomfort women usually complain about was due to an anxious psychopathological constitution, which interprets a gesture of politeness as aggression. There are certain women who meet into this psychopathological pattern, and I wrote about them here as I will come back with more in details about them in the following articles. They generally interpret community politeness as an explicit sign of courtship initiation. But here I do not refer to these cases, but to those who are explicitly approached by men for the courtship purposes. This is not a community politeness gesture. The politeness is meant to harmonize social relations between community members. It is a behavior of personal individuality diminution in favor of the others personal status lifting. On the contrary, the courting and the sexuality is an individual exclusive behavior for the rest of the community from the function of reproduction, for selective purposes. The courtship is a competition of individual genetic physical qualities, covered by a polite packaging. So it is actually the politeness polarity.

Too explicit approaching as unknown person makes sense from the male sexual instinct perspective. It must be available at any time for mating. But for the specific to the female sexual instinct selective optics, such a thing is inappropriate. For this reason, the too explicit approaching from an unknown man who initiates a relationship from cause discomfort also for a nonaxiety woman, not just for the anxious ones. There are four causes for this discomfort, somehow related to each other. 1. The first is that the explicit approach of a woman on the street or in any of the public spaces for the purpose of courtship initiating violates at least 2 of the 4 of the traditional pre-courtship rules described in this sectionn of this series. They refer to the prior knowing the potential partner or introducing him by a trusted person. Often such practices also violate the 4th courtship pre-rule, related to the initiator lower social rank. Most street initiators try their luck at nicer women or better dressed than they are. Obviously, such a practice contradicts the female sexuality main selective interest.

The women are totally entitled to ask for courtship rules education so that they should not be excluded from the decision taken by the men in regard to a more or less explicit love relationship with them. Without such an explicit sign from them, stepping to the courtship 5-th prior stage is a clear lack of respect for the woman. Regardless of how beautiful the man's gesture would be, if he ignores stage 5, without giving the woman the opportunity to choose, according to stage 3, then the woman may feel like a prostitute whose love is bought, as mentioned above.

2. In addition, this also violate of the courtship 3rd pre-initiation stage, as described in this section  . Most of the women who are suddenly approached the street feel excluded from the relationship building after such an explicit initiative, and it is normal to refuse such proposals. Even if the social rank or the qualities of a man that explicitly approaches a woman to form a couple, are similar or even superior to her, by this path his chances of success are lower. Only the fact that he decides to explicitly initiate the courtship in the public space, like anyone else, disqualifies him in the selective eyes of feminine sexual receptivity. Basically he did something every man can do. It has merged with the majority, which is not very attractive to a woman. The only thing that could get him out of this mediocrity incompatible with the female sexuality selective interests is an exceptional gesture, a word of spirit or something else. Unfortunately, these things do not come by order...

A man attempt to emotionally approach a woman without her explicit consent has been denied in the past and is still today. The contemporary society is constantly abusing a person's neutrality to force acceptance into a relationship or another  , but that is only a poor attempt to patch the dictatorship and slavery in the freedom colors. Similarly, forcing a woman's emotional closeness acceptance is a sign of abuse. Given the fact that some women are blackmailed into accepting a more intense sex life with their husbands, such an accelerated and unilateral-male initiative of intimate relationships is not appreciated by them.

3. The third cause is our society women normal fear towards the sex offenders. I believed for a long time that this fear is exaggerated, and I considered it as a symptom of either paranoia (of persecution form), or anxiety, or a paranoid (or traumatic) personality disorder. There are indeed women who overlap this psychopathology. But beyond this minority, the women experience a real danger. After I studied the sexual crime official statistics released by the state authorities, I realized that we are living a true conspiracy regarding the violence against women . There are states that put massive social pressure on the marginalized one, such as the US, Russia, China, Romania and many more, and give no social protection to these people. These states, simply protect the sexual criminals  in order to cover up the luxurious murderous sadists the hold the power.

So the women have serious reasons to fear not only unknown men, but even the acquaintances, although the statistics tell that a street courtship initiator is not a rapist. Not every woman is an expert in rape and crime statistics to know that such men are not masked pimps or rapists. In a society that does not provide clear statistical data on rapes, kidnappings and sadistic murders of women, it is normal for a woman to interpret an unknown street courtship initiator as a potential rapist. Or, even if they know the statistics that show that the rapist is not a street courtship initiator as, they may not want to take these risks, no matter if minimal. So the chances of women refusing the street courtship initiation in these places are bigger than in others. And, it is advisable for men to try courtship initiation elsewhere rather than on the street, besides waiting for the clear signs from the woman.

4. Finally, the fourth cause of women's reluctance toward the unknown approaches in the public space is the emotional abuse risk. A man that stalks on the street and proposes intimate relationships to women is a potential Casanova. He passes from one woman to another, stops at no one and leaves behind sufferance. I already described these behaviors here  . Due to the emotional abuse that such a man can create, he is bypassed by women. A courtship street initiator cannot be distinguished from an abuser, and the women are not willing to risk it.

Every man who uses this should know that the street is one of the worst places to start the courtship. Men who practice it have the impression that they can break these strongly consolidated norms in the human consciousness, just because they think are special. After their failure, they are surprised to be rejected, and sometimes behave unjustly in the face of this refusal, by offending or abusing the woman.

The 4th courtship pre-initiation rule, respectively the social status concordance, should be understood and assumed in particular. Men should be educated from school so that they do not become aggressive or abusive towards the woman who refuses their courtship initiation both in this street context and in other contexts and in other interests. The feminist slogan "no means no" is perfectly justified and should be applied in every human relations in general, not just in the courtship. A proposal from anyone should not necessarily be accepted as in the Middle Ages according to the criterion of class or gender superiority.

A man who goes directly to the intimate relationships proposal can be successful in front of women who are in a hurry or struck by the direct approach originality. Those 4 traditional pre-rules are sufficient to regulate the relationships between the men who initiate street courting and the women who accept or refuse it. A discrete attempt to socialize can result in courtship if the approached woman shows obvious signs in this regard. If she does not offer back such signs, any effort is in vain. After being ignored like that, many men go on to more explicit signs instead of showing a better version of them, according to the courtship stage 4. But in this way they violate the first 2 traditional courtship pre-rules and their approach success chances are close to 0.

Are you a poet? Do you have an audience that appreciates you? Then yes. You can risk such street approach for women in public space, assuming the humility of being rejected. Most likely, poets much higher than you have been rejected in the past. If you think you are better than them, then, yes, you can try your luck. But, beware that you may be evaluated below your actual level with this risk taking!

d. Traditional solutions for women to avoid complications after inopportune street approaches by men

For an average woman the discomfort of an inappropriate approach is not so big as to make a big irascibility crisis out of it. But there are others who obstinately seek out the scandal, and behave seductively through clothing and gestures. If the man happens to be shy or feel insecure about him, then they find the right time to humiliate him in everybody’s eyes. It is a disproportionate reaction from some women that should not be encouraged. The school generally did not focus on educating young people on what to do to find a partner in love. Sex education mainly refers to situations after the couple's appearance but not how they should be formed. Many who try such approaches do not know that it bothers women. And the education with aggressive words cannot be done. Of course, as I will show later  , in this case there is a sadistic interest of the histrionic conformation women themselves to specifically humiliate such weak men, thus taking precautionary measures in choosing them, making sure that they will not become violent later.

Then, there are situations that this kind of women wildly interprets the slightest sign of courtship initiation as disrespect, sexual harassment or rape. And in this case I do not consider those who move on to clearer signs of starting the courtship, after the woman did not respond with interest to his previous signs. I refer strictly to those who showed very discreet signs, which are generally shown in other contexts than those of the courtship. To counteract this there is enough the so far arguments: the discreet gestures or conversations with which one can test the woman's readiness to accept the courtship also apply in other contexts than the courtship. This can neither be prohibited nor incriminated because it is constantly used in the society. The woman lack of enthusiasm in front of this discreet sign is a criterion for stopping the courtship. Such a reticent response is enough, not an aggressive or humiliating response to the one who tried to initiate it.

Such a simple rule has been practiced in the past and is practiced even today until the radical feminism started to ostracize any sign made by a man, no matter how slight it might be. As I pointed out in a previous section  , the peaceful courtship initiation is not an aggression, neither sexual harassment nor rape. In the video below you can see an example of a woman, who becomes aggressive and almost starts a fight with a man because he previously greeted her without knowing her.

The channel that presents this footage is a clearly anti-feminist and even misogynist at some points. It is possible that the above scene is not a genuine one, but a caricature against the wide feminism, by its many opponents. But it presents a radical feminism reality of wildly interpreting a courtship discrete sign as an aggression. The reaction in this video is a clear exaggeration to such a discreet sign, even if it violates the above mentioned 4th pre-initiation courtship rule, namely the compatibility of the social rank. I will return to the detailed analysis of this exaggeration in future articles. So far, I'm just offering it as an example.

The woman absolute human cultural refusal to enter the courtship flirts, according to the courtship 4th pre-initiation rule, dictated by the human social stratification, causes an instinctual confusion. Her refusal is interpreted by the male sexual instinct as passing to the courtship 3-rd pre-initiation rule, as stagnation. As have already mentioned in this study, during the traditional period when the social classes were hermetically isolated, the lower hierarchical level man could not initiate the second stage of courtship to a member of a higher class woman. But that did not mean that the sexual instinct would also numb to the outward rules of society. In between the classical and the industrial eras, the courtship 4th pre-initiation rule began to be ignored, according to the instinct’s interest. The absolute institutional refusal from the beloved women to accept their courtship made the Romantics raise the stake. Remarkable cultural productions were born in this way. "The Sorrows of Young Werther" is one of them. "The Evening Star" is another. Eminescu kept walking "Down Where The Lonely Poplars Grow", but his inner ideal of accessing to a higher class through love was realized only on a phantasmic level, in "Poor Dionysos". Many men saw it directly that the beloved person refusal or the obstacles against getting close to her had rather reinforced their passion than stop it. A more or less marginal man, without the above cultural figures talent is rather incited by a duplicitous and perverse refusal from a histrionic woman.

The more ore less histrionics women instinctively feel this. And sometimes they raise the stake to the seduction without a concrete interest of courtship, but just to exercise her forces. But they must assume the risks of entering such a seduction game. A marginal man, humiliated in the daily life by numerous frustrations, can turn his anger on a woman who ventures into such games. The feminist slogan "no mean no" is justified for decent women. But it loses consistency with the seductive histrionic women case. They end up being abused by men who interpret their sensuality as accepting of the courtship 5th pre-initiation stage. The state cannot and should not cover these games. Women in general need to be careful about how they refuse such a social excluded man that approaches them on the street. A humiliating refused man can act violently, so in this case they need diplomacy. Basically, the women pretty much know what this diplomacy is, whether they are average or they are histrionic-seductive. I will briefly enumerate below three solutions to this problem to emphasize once again that the society has solved these problems long before nowadays. They need only be retaken over and adapted to the conditions of the contemporary world.

The returning to the ring institution is enough to signal that a woman does not want an approach in the public space by a man, if such a minor frustration is perceived as oversized as in the case before. But the returning to this institution must be honest and consistent. There are women who take their ring off the finger on the street not for the sake of meta-justice arrogance, but to ambivalently sign the readiness for re-engagement. And when the "offer" is dissatisfying they invoke the right to be alone. Indeed, even the underprivileged men who randomly approach women, as a routine, without differentiation, do not behave fairly. But also the women who practice such things get into a dangerous abuse game. I will return to this topic in the following articles.

On the other hand, the men direct approaches from on the social media can be stopped by the refusal to accept the followers or to include the unknown profiles in the list of friends in the social networks, if the courtship initiating frustration is so big. There is the possibility of refusing contact in the main social networks. Or, it is possible to create a public account, which involves communicating with larger groups, and a personal account, which communicates with friends in real life. The public should not have personal photos or location. The moderate feminism  found a whole set of rules on this fact. A reader sent me a very detailed article  about what women should do to avoid the sexual harassment online or in real life. I found very interesting the "Block Together" application used for Twitter that will automatically block any follower that is active for less than 7 days and has less than 15 followers. For more details, just visit the link above!

Only, yes, these women have a dubious conflict of interest. They are undecided between two things that at one point conflict with each other. On the one hand they need the advantage of popularity in that particular social media network, coming from the unknown people positive reactions and comments. Such "friends" appreciate their activities and raise up their status in the others perception. For this reason, they are received in the circle of friends from the respective online social network. But when these "friends" start talking through the private messages, things are no longer pleasant for them, and they want to change the approaching social rules. In the same situation are the women who have married out of interest and not out of love, and wake up in their mid-life that no longer find their identity, and feel used in the marital couple. Basically the "friends" dilemma from the social media networks resumes from the virtual level into the real life the wife married for material reasons, or the luxury prostitute who needs the others admiration to raise the price for her services but their approaches destroys her plans.

The third solution to avoid unpleasant situations is the appropriate dress to the place and time. In point C of this article  I have shown that avoiding summary, provocative clothing in the dubious urban spaces is a universal solution for the problems that comes from too often approaches from men. I will return to this topic in the following articles because there is a debate here on the underprivileged men "education" so as not to approach such seductive women. This debate is broader and has more diverse topics and that is why I will dedicate it a distinctive section. So far, I only briefly show that such a precaution is a diplomatic solution to avoid this kind of short-term inconvenience, so as not to cause confusion among men.

So there is no need to revolutionize the civilized behavior through the exclusive female courtship initiation. The traditional courtship pre-initiation stages and rules are good enough. On the one hand the most important courtship pre-initiation stages, namely the 1/st and the 5-th are decided by the woman herself. And these are the most important. The exclusive female courtship initiation proposal is already covered by this traditional norm. Then, a couple love relationship with a passive man is undesirable for most women. I will return to this topic in more details in the following articles. I will present in them auxiliary arguments against the feminist exclusive female courtship initiation proposal and to incriminate (even if only morally) the greeting without consent. Further on there are 3 articles in which I will describe the conflict of the exclusive female courtship initiation theory first with the traditional-conservative mentality  , then with the poetic and spiritual love , and then with moderate feminism itself .

31 martie 2020

4.7. There is no need for another rule regarding the courtship, but to update the courtship traditional pre-steps and rules to the contemporary lifestyle

4. The feminist proposal of exclusively female courtship initiation 

4.7. There is no need for another rule regarding the courtship, but to update the courtship traditional pre-steps and rules to the contemporary lifestyle 

I have shown in this article, ,  the traditional pre-courtship rules. These rules and stages are as well embedded in the human consciousness of the courtship as the social norms. Most people instinctively follow these rules. Those who violate them are a minority. The society does not clearly affirm them, but tradition has always promoted the patience, not only in loving relationships, but in all human activities. In the bellow document on Social Etiquette and Good Manners, on the page 8, it can be seen that the patience is one of the characteristic of the rule of the first meeting a woman for courtship purposes.

The protection and focusing on women's interests and needs are part of the courtship prior rules that are covered by this traditional Social Etiquette. Unfortunately, the humble social condition people did not have access to it and usually they do not much know about.

Today the internet access has allowed such contact but some of its rules are no longer in line with the gender equality contemporary society natural feminism. Here is the case with the rule number 3, 6, 7, 9, 10, 12, 16, 19, 21 and partly 14 of this courtship prior rules set. . Regardless these rules variations, we recognize in them a common denominator in every each of them and that is the man given superior status in society and inside the family. And that's why these norms clearly stated by the high society have become obsolete nowadays.

Thus, although they worked well in a traditional society, they have become slightly inapplicable today. We live in a new society. The frequent job changes in the contemporary society made them unusable. The contemporary mobility and the corporate mindset made the human relations to change. There is no time for putting in practice these rules and pre-courtship stages in the way they have been traditionally consolidated. Besides the lack of time, the contemporary society specific isolation brings with it the lack of friends. This implies both selecting a partner narrowing horizon and weakening the second pre-courtship rule, which is introducing through the close ones. The pressure of loneliness and the sexual impulses eventually ignore this rule. It is highly ironic that in an overcrowded world, some people may not find the right half love partner.

The social dynamics, the freedoms resulting from the social classes boundaries stretching have led to social rules wide confusion. The possibility of pregnancy termination or of the treatment for a possible sexually transmitted disease has made women more open to forgetting these both pre-existing and actual courtship rules and stages. Therefore the courtship traditional general rules have become abandoned or weakened. A cyclical lifestyle, with ups and downs, with changes the entourage, friends or even family, can allow them to give up these traditional rules. The adolescents tend to constantly jump over them, due to their rush to become adults. But the love failures they keep experiencing once they reach adulthood make them go back to them rather than go on their own with creating personal norms. The traditional norms renunciation only because they are old, has brought unimaginable problems, such as the risks of abuse and mental suffering at one specific time for everybody. The contemporary lifestyle has abandoned them, but they were created precisely to prevent the emotional abuse that results once again out of ignoring them. So it is the case now that these norms get dust cleaned and reused in the society, there where they do not conflict with the gender egalitarianism mentality. Not everything that is tradition is unusable as to be vehemently rejected.

a. The risks of total renunciation of the pre-courtship stages and rules

In the past, the couples were formed in the community and partners rarely left each other. In addition to the unsatisfied sexual impulses frustrations, in the past the choosing of a partner was made after the couple fidelity interests. In traditional western urban agglomerations, the couples were formed based on their parents' experience of choosing the best partner for their sons and daughters. The main criteria for choosing a life partner were not those of today. The beauty, the exceptional, the extraordinary, that we seek today for our life partner, was secondary criteria in the past. However people also were very similar one another as mainly they had the same occupations. But the most important criterion of forming a couple was the partner health so the two live together as much as possible. If one of them would have gotten ill or died young, then the remaining alive chances to reunite with another partner were small. For this reason, the marriage was a life strategy that involved the entire family.

Unlike those times, today's couples form following a special affection that the partners feel for each other. The premarital love was not specific for the times when the courtship stages crystallized in the animal world. The love between the partners came after the couple formed. In the Western contemporary society this is rarely the case. Today the most important thing for a relationship is that sparkling that makes the person in love to dream of, other than the potential partner health. In the absence of this spark, the woman does not accept to go to pre stage 5 . Separately or in continuation of this sparkling, the interests of the partners depending on the level of civilization also change. Recently the radical differences in options and frequency of libidinal impulses have appeared. They do not necessarily create incompatibilities in the couple, but no satisfaction. So the contemporary people increasingly test this side, as sexual preferences become more and more eccentric.

I have shown in this article that there is a psychopathological background that rejects in any way any male courtship initiation, no matter how discreet it might be. Close to this category are the women who either have a hyperlidinal partner, or who have a low sexual desire . But not all women's refusal to accept the courtship is due to the psychopathological symptoms. A normal woman does not accept courtship mainly due to the fact that the man does not meet the 4-th rule criteria or the 3-rd prior stage. If a man skips this stage in courtship initiating, then the woman can interpret his gesture as evaluating her as a prostitute. Which is not exactly what the women want from a relationship ... In the same way it can happen the other way around: a man who is prompt with an overly explicit courtship proposal from a woman may misinterpret her as a prostitute, although she may even want to build a stable couple relationship.

If we were a species with few individuals, then the mating from the pure chance of any partner meeting would be justified by the need for species survival. This is probably what those who want such relationships want. But we are not. We are the predator species with the largest population. So the women are forced by their own sexual instinct to be selective, by the female sexuality principles as it exists even in the mammal world. Socializing with a woman, friendship relations with her on different levels of interaction does not mean that she is automatically willing to accept a loving relationship with her social partners. Yes, there is the reality of friendships with benefits, but such a thing cannot become a universal rule. Whoever does not learn this will have no female friends in the family or in the community, but only subordinates who execute unemotional orders.

Some of the traditional society rules are sexist, discriminatory. I have shown above how the Social Etiquette and Good Manners have become obsolete. Social rules are not given once and for all. They change with society itself. In the same way, the courtship rules have changed and are constantly changing as the society itself does. These can be accelerated and thus the contemporary need for time can be satisfied. However, they should not be abandoned altogether. Once they are cleansed of these conflicts with contemporary society, they must be put back in human behavior. The patience promoted by that Etiquette from the previous link on page 8, is a rule that the courtship must keep. No other courtship rules should be invented that roughly contradict the traditional ones, just because they are traditional but only because would contradict the gender equality, contemporary liberties and group minorities dignity. Not all the traditional rules contradict these contemporary values. The traditional society rules must be viewed with more respect and understanding and use from there what is good and functional in today's society.

Both the theory of the courtship exclusive female initiation and the unknown men explicit approaches come ignore these traditional preceding rules and stages for courtship. Those who support them did not receive education concerning them, or can afford to ignore them due to their high social status. Those raised in humble social condition don't know they exist. In their families the marriages were arranged by their parents or were a rape consequence that later turned into marriage at the families or justice pressure. There's none to blame for that. Most of us have a humble social condition. And this is not bad and not even shameful. It is rather shameful what the upper classes did when either conquered or attracted the "barbarians" in the state of social inferiority. But, now that they have regulated these courtship rules, everybody can take and use them as general rules in the society. It is not necessary to reinvent the wheel, but to take over what the society has already experienced before.

b. What can be kept from the prior to the courtship traditional rules and stages

It is the dialogue. Building couple relationship coming from both partners will remain a perennial value in the courtship. It has been clearly affirmed by the Social Etiquette and Good Manners in the past and must be preserved in the future. This is a rule of the ancestral background of the female sexual instinct and will be perpetuated for a long time from here by the power of its deep consolidation in the biological background. This has been done constantly and in the past, without explicitly detailing the process where no Etiquette was verbalized. Except in cases where one of the partners has a depressive, dependent or avoidant psychopathological conformation, the both couple members, not just one of them, be it a woman or a man, must participate in the construction of an intimate relationship. The emotional and physical closeness must be achieved gradually by mutual acceptance of the progress in the relationship. These levels of construction of the couple's relationship must be made by discrete signs, which give the potential partner, woman or man, the possibility of elegant refusal, without being put in difficulty, if the person interested in forming a couple is not wanted.

The discrete sign means that gesture or expression that is widely used outside the couple's relationship. Greeting is such a sign. The unique attempt to attract a woman's attention by a man through a smile, greeting or conversation initiation, which is a discrete courtship initiation, is normal as that of the woman towards a man. The compliment can be such a sign if it does not refer to the woman physical intimacy. For example, a compliment for the woman dresses is such a discreet sign. A compliment may become too explicit if it refers to her body.

These signs are sufficient. The woman understands man’s intentions and she will go to the 5th stage of acceptance, if she considers it appropriate. Most women who support the theory of the exclusive female courtship initiation have exactly this stage in mind, which accords also with the courtship traditional rules. But I will show in the following articles that the radical feminists understand and pursue something else from this stage.

Men generally make a big mistake when they send more explicit courtship messages to a woman who replied with less intimate message to their previous messages. If these signs launched by the courtship initiating person are too explicit then they invariably put the other person in a mess, as she does not want to construct of a couple relationship with that person. Any person, whether male or female, should be given the option of discreet refusal to courtship. Only if the woman responds in the same direction, with more explicit messages than those of stimulation coming from the initiating person, then the signs can become explicit, and eventually move to the couple approaching. Otherwise, the chances of getting close are very low and the courtship efforts are meaningless.

The courtship traditional pre rules consolidate the gradual intimacy between the couple members. All we have to do is adapt them to the contemporary speed. The intimacy between the partners must be done gradually, regardless of whether it is fast or not. In this case it does not matter if the man or the woman initiates the court; if the degree of discretion gives the other person enough room to refuse the courtship continuation, without being put into difficulty, then things are solved by themselves and these problems that some women complain about would no longer exist. There is no need to reinvent the wheel. It is not necessary to introduce this new rule of exclusive female courtship initiation, but just taking and adjusting these already traditionally given norms to the contemporary way of life.

There are two situations in which these principles are radically violated. The first is that of the men who offer too explicit courtship initiation signs and leave no room for the approached woman elegant refusal. The other is that of the discrete sign wild interpretation as sexual harassment or rape by the radical feminism. I will continue to analyze each in the next article .

Popular Posts