Loading...

16 iulie 2015

Situatia din Grecia- o ironica reactualizare moderna a dilemei stoicism - hedonism



Exista doua pareri diametral opuse despre situatia din Grecia. Una este cea conspirationist-economica si cealalta este cea neoliberala. Prima are alura umanista si sustine ca Grecia e supusa unui asalt colonialist, de anihilare a independentei si cucerire economica. Cealalta e vizibil corporatista si sustine ca grecii nu muncesc si se imprumuta de la occidentali pentru o viata de huzur.

Desi, conform formatiunii mele teoretice, sint mai aproape de viziunea umanista, din start sustin ca adevarul e pe undeva intre cele doua puncte de vedere. Cred ca fiecare dintre cele doua viziuni au puncte slabe. Am sa le analizez pe fiecare in parte, mai intai pe cea corporatist-neoliberalista de care ma simt mai strain.

Remarc mai intai ca mass-media bombardeaza naivii cu aceasta idee care a ajuns sa fie sustinuta inclusiv prin reclame, asa cum se vede aici:



Numai faptul ca acestei idei i se face reclama o face din start dubioasa in ochii mei. Resping aceasta viziune din start pentru ca stiu ce inseamna reclamele. Am aratat aici (http://baldovinconcept.blogspot.ro/2011/01/exemple-de-manipulare-si-obedienta.html) ce inseamna publicitatea, asa ca lucrurile sint clare pentru mine. Vorbim aici despre un fel de picatura chinezeasca a manipularii.

In aceasta reclama se spune foarte malitios ca „Grecii au inventat democratia si statul… degeaba” . Dupa cum voi argumenta mai jos, o astfel de idee contine ceva adevar, insa, asa cum o prezinta reclama in cauza, ea este o exagerare grotesca. Daca ne uitam la statisticile orelor lucrate de greci vedem ca sint destui europeni care lucreaza mult mai putin decat grecii:

https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?DataSetCode=ANHRS

Iata ca acest grafic, si multe altele de acest gen, arata faptul ca ei, de fapt, lucreaza destul de mult. Sunt putine tari din lume care lucreaza mai mult ca ei. De exemplu, belgienii lucreaza putin peste 1500 de ore pe an. Inclusiv „harnicii” nemti lucrau putin peste 1400 de ore pe an pana in 2008. De atunci incoace lucreaza chiar sub 1400 de ore.

Desigur, faptul ca Grecia este presata atat de agresiv de Occident nu este un lucru chiar intamplator. Protestele de acum cativa ani din Atena, cand cetatenii au sfidat autoritatile in bloc, de la mic la mare, au legatura cu aceste presiuni. Ca o dictatura cosmetizata, democratia occidentala nu priveste cu ochi buni acest tip de punere in discutie a autoritatii pe care grecii au exersat-o atunci. UE a adus Greciei acelasi argument cu care fermierul isi docilizeaza animalele: ori faceti ce vrem noi, ori va inchidem conducta.

Folosirea mass- media ca varf de lance al acestei presiuni se explica prin interesul de a-i convinge pe europeni de falsa idee ca scaderea nivelului lor de trai se datoreaza grecilor care, chipurile, ar primi fonduri pentru a-si mentine un stil de viata risipitor. Desigur, in aceste conditii, profitul angajatorilor va creste, angajatii acceptand conditii mai defavorabile de lucru. In fond, „scaderea cheltuielilor” propuse de multtrambitata austeritate, fata de care s-a si facut celebrul referendum, este tot o strategie pentru convingerea „subordonatilor” sa presteze munca mai multa pentru o retributie mai mica. Acest fapt inseamna un profit mai mare pentru corporatisti. Desigur, de fiecare data cand exista o adancire a prapastiei dintre clasele sociale implicate in aceasta relatie, este vorba de un anumit tip de colonialism, adica de un ansamblu de abuzuri mai mult sau mai putin vizibile asupra subordonabililor pentru a fi transformati in subordonati.


Si totusi, personal nu pot fi de acord nici cu atitudinea conspirationista prezentata in acest documentar:


Asadar lenevia si huzurul care li se imputa grecilor, sint manipulari media. Problema economiei Greciei este insa a eficientei acestei munci, adica de raportul dintre salariul platit de angajator si valoarea acestei munci. Cu alte cuvinte, salariile lor erau cam mari pentru ceea ce produceau ei si vindeau celorlalti. Cum e posibil asa ceva? Foarte simplu: daca ari o anumita suprafata de pamant cu sapa atunci muncesti mai mult decat cel care o face cu tractorul. Cam asa ceva a fost si cu economia Greciei timp de peste o jumatate de secol. Occidentul a cam pompat bani in spatiul grecesc pentru a se crea iluzia unui capitalism functional spre a nu cadea prada comunismului precum celelalte tari balcanice. Grecia a fost moneda de schimb pentru care Occidentul a lasat Rusia sovietica sa influenteze viata politica in Europa de est. Principalul motiv pentru asta a fost faptul ca acolo s-a nascut insasi Europa si insasi societatea civilizata, acum mai bine de 2500 de ani. Nu se putea face un experiment social in aceasta zona. De asemenea, pericolul islamic venit din partea Turciei cu care Grecia a avut un conflict secular, a necesitat un astfel de transfer discret de capital.

Daca ne uitam la statisticile castigurilor medii pe cap de locuitor in 2012, vedem ca venitul mediu in 2012 era de 2300 $, cu mult peste tarile balcanice.

http://www.statista.com/statistics/226956/average-world-wages-in-purchasing-power-parity-dollars/

Dintre acestea doar Ciprul (tot un fel de Grecia) o depaseste. Si nu turismul cel vestit al grecilor este cel care ducea fraul economiei grecesti, conform Wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economy_of_Greece

Dealtfel, in acest clasament Grecia (si Ciprul) este prima tara turistica la venit pe cap de locuitor. Or fi frumoase locurile lor dar nu cred ca ar fi cele mai frumoase.

Cu alte cuvinte, economia greceasca a fost impinsa din spate. Ea s-a dezvoltat intr-o relatie de dependenta fata de Occident. Stilul occidental de viata al grecilor nu avea acoperire in economia lor, la fel cum cineva face cumparaturi peste bugetul sau. Dar iata ca, acum cand Rusia „s-a dat pe brazda”, devenind ea insasi capitalista, nu mai e nevoie de un astfel de punct. Dar, intre timp, grecii au ajuns deja momiti cu iluziile vietii inaltului standard. Capitalismul vrea sa treaca mai departe si sa investeasca in alte tari „lenese”, cum este cazul tarilor arabe recent convertite la democratie pentru a le aduce cetatenii sa traiasca o viata trepidanta ce ii imbogatesc pe corporatistii de pretutindeni. E timpul ca Grecia sa presteze profit.

Situatia asta se foloseste si la nivel microeconomic. Aceasta este si pacaleala cu care tinerii sint atrasi in corporatii cu salarii mari initiale (momire). Dupa aceea, devenind dependenti de fite si (fals) statut social in fata cunoscutilor conform acestei momiri, corporatiile ii exploateaza nemilos, ei neputand sa se desprinda de acest stil de viata supraevaluat. Cei care nu fac fata „strangerii surubului”, dupa momirea initiala, sint pur si simplu concediati, cazand prada depresiei odata cu scaderea standardului de viata. Afara asteapta alti naivi cu atitudine de invingator sa fie transformati in legume dupa ani de sclavagism prin corporatii. Am trecut personal prin aceasta experienta cu corporatiile asa ca pot sa inteleg perfect acest mecanism diabolic, responsabil cu explozia tulburarilor psihice in secolul al XX-lea.

Si totusi situatia aceasta imorala este practic imposibil de transat conform principiilor moralei clasice. Corporatistii invoca faptul ca, prin astfel de mecanisme, economia si tehnologia evolueaza si nivelul de trai creste. Cei care ies desfigurati emotional dupa ani sau poate zeci de ani dintr-o astfel de experienta corporatista, sint sacrificatii in numele evolutiei speciei. Cei drept, aici au dreptate, viata in general ofera numeroase exemple ale individului sacrificat in numele speciei. Acelasi argument este reluat , la nivel macrosocial, in cazul situatiei din Grecia: pe de o parte occidentalii sint de blamat pentru ca au destabilizat o societate dupa cel de-al doilea razboi mondial, momind-o precum corporatiile pe tineri si obisnuind-o cu un stil de viata peste puterea economica, subminandu-i practic independenta economica. Dar, pe de alta parte, occidentalii nu sint de blamat pentru ca nu vor sa mai transfere capital in acest spatiu. Nimeni nu poate fi blamat pentru ca nu ofera ceva cuiva fie pe gratis fie la schimb.

Dar lipsa de scrupule a Occidentului in relatia cu Grecia e evidenta. In documentarul de mai sus se vorbeste constant in el despre presiunile facute de Occident pentru unele privatizari frauduloase. Coruptia din jurul acestor privatizari se vede de la o posta. Bunurile statului, au ajuns astazi sa fie vandute pe nimic la licitatii trucate. Insa, in aceeasi masura, multe dintre aceste bunuri au fost facute de banii occidentalilor pompati dupa cel de-al doilea razboi mondial. Cumva situatia se echilibreaza.

De asemenea, asanumitele ajutoare financiare, chipurile, menite sa ajute economia Greciei, de fapt, cu concursul unor politicieni corupti, au intrat in depozitele sucursalelor bancilor occidentale, dupa cum multi au observat. Iar povestea transformarii si multiplicarii banilor si datoriei cu care ei vin se poate vedea in documentarul de mai jos pe care il repostez si pentru cei care inca nu-l stiu, sau l-au uitat, ca o lectie ce trebuie mereu si mereu reluata.


Dar, dincolo de aceste realitati economice dure ale unei hartuieli din partea unor adevarati pradatori umani, ramane un adevar: Grecia are o mare problema cu dependenta financiara fata de Occident. In plan concret asta inseamna ca Grecia primeste o gama de obiecte sau servicii, mai mult sau mai putin vitale, pentru ca acestea nu se fac la nivel intern in ograda proprie. Cei care le fac pot sa ceara orice pret pentru aceasta dependenta, printre care si aceasta alambicata austeritate. De fapt austeritatea sociala exact acest lucru inseamna, respectiv un pret mai mare in cadrul acestui schimb. Iar atata timp cat nu poti sa spui „Nu” acestei dependente si esti santajabil intr-un anume fel cu retragerea suportului financiar, inseamna ca economia ta nu functioneaza. Adica te-ai intins mai mult decat iti e plapuma. Daca scoatem Occidentul din aceasta poveste urata, Grecia tot nu isi poate rezolva problemele. Caci in momentul de fata nu se mai pune problema datoriilor de platit catre creditorii occidentali ci colapsul economic. Banii se retrag de la o vreme cu portia de la bancomate. In scurt timp economiile personale ale cetatenilor se vor epuiza. Cinismul partenerilor occidentali e una; dar faptul ca tu nu te poti organiza economic ca stat, fara influenta acestor hiene, e cu totul altceva. Aici grecii sint pe cont propriu in asumarea acestei crize.

Am spus-o si o voi repeta mult timp de acum inainte: trebuie sa ai puterea sa iesi dintr-un contract ale carei conditii nu le doresti. Nu poti si sa beneficiezi de avantajele unui contract fara sa ii si respecti conditiile. Ai tot dreptul sa spui „NU”. Ai tot dreptul, ca sistem social, sa iesi tu insuti din zona euro. Ai tot dreptul ca individ sa iti dai demisia de la job. Ai o scuza pentru situatia ta dificila din prezent prin faptul ca ai fost naiv, ai fost tanar si n-ai stiut in ce capcana intri. Dar, daca ramai in aceste capcane, e si vina ta pentru aceasta dependenta si trebuie sa-ti asumi aceasta slabiciune. In loc sa protestezi impotriva austeritatii impuse, trebuie sa protestezi impotriva lipsei tale de organizare personala. Invata tu sa fii eficient!

Contraexemplul Greciei este revolutia din Islanda din 2010. Aceasta tara mica a reusit atunci sa iasa din aceasta capcana a hedonismului. Ea a refuzat dependenta de fite si destabilizare economica venite in special de la Londra si supravietuieste bine-mersi fara nici un fel de sustinere „mesianica”. Si-a nationalizat bancile si si-a organizat economia pentru a functiona pentru proprii cetateni, nu pentru corporatii. Dar, pentru asta, Islanda a suferit o adevarata izolare pe scena internationala. Mass-media (controlata de corporatii) nu a spus nimic despre aceasta Revolutie Islandeza.

Pe langa intrebarea stiuta daca sint de acord cu masurile de austeritate, grecii trebuiau sa mai raspunda la inca una, anume daca ar fi dispusi sa iasa din aceasta zona de santaj occidental si sa-si reinventeze ei insisi economia de la zero, cam cum a facut Descartes cu filosofia. Dar asta ar insemna si un pic de coborare la munca de jos, la producerea de bunuri pe care toti le-o dedica tuturor. Din pacate, Grecia nu vrea sa faca acest pas inapoi si sa o ia de la zero. Ea vrea sa fie in prim-plan. Ea are impresia ca i se cuvine conducta cu finante pe baza faptului ca grecii ar fi urmasii zeilor, iar restul umanitatii trebuie sa fie sclavii lor in virtutea unui alt tip de drept divin. Si aici e marea problema a Geciei. Protestele din zilele astea din Grecia nu cer iesirea din zona euro sau UE. Ele cer doar suspendarea austeritatii, adica continuarea situatiei in acelasi fel ca si pana acum. Nu cred ca se va mai putea.



Voi fi mereu un anticorporatist pentru ca respect dreptul omului simplu de a trai un stil de viata auster, fara momelile corporatiste care au dat sclavagismului o noua dimensiune. Din acest punct de vedere Grecia chiar are nevoie de acest gen de austeritate, una chiar autoimpusa ci nu impusa din exterior de UE. Solutia pentru aceasta ofensiva corporatista este refuzul falselor idealuri ale „Visului American” si un soi de decenta personala si comunitara care, din pacate, lipseste noilor generatii cam peste tot in lumea civilizata. Copiii de astazi sunt imbatati cu povesti hedoniste pe care le vor plati mai tarziu cu dependenta, cam la fel cum s-a facut cu Grecia. Ironia face ca, in antichitate, o astfel de dilema sa fie reprezentata chiar de doi filosofi greci, Zenon si Epicur. De la ei istoria a dezvoltat o dilema inca nerezolvata nici pana astazi. Unul a predicat cumpatarea, celalalt obtinerea placerii prin orice mijloace. Cred ca urmasii lor l-au cam uitat pe Zenon in favoarea lui Epicur.





»»  read more

4 iulie 2015

The same-sex couples and their opponents


Varianta in limba romana aici

Since the US decision to legalize sexual relations between persons of the same sex there has came back an old debate on the subject. There are absurd arguments on both sides, but it seems that the bigger ones are those against legalizing such relationships, or even against those involved in it. I wrote this article to give a reply to such judgment errors. Of course, I selected the most visible ones because, if I would have analyzed all them all, then such a text would have turned into a several dozen pages study, which is not the case here.

Before making an opinion, those involved in this dispute should study some psychopathology, although the field is a bit distorted on this topic *. But even a summary study on the matter reveals a few things that the gay rights opponents have not quite clear. These prejudices can be broadly corrected if the following are known:

  • - Homosexuality is not contagious. . The attraction to the same sex is not due to any virus or something spread by touching any person with such sexual orientation.

  • - Homosexuality is not transmitted through education. There is no causal relationship between the way child is treated by parents and its subsequent sexual orientation as an adult. The existence of a community of same-sex attraction people is not made and is not strengthened by "propaganda" or "recruitment" as usually believed.  

  • - Homosexuality is not pedophilia or other libidinal disorders. Those who feel the attraction for the same sex can not be a pedophile or voyeur or something else like this at the same time. There can not be combined several libidinal disorder in one single person. So, the giving some rights for LGBT community does not mean legalizing dangerous to society behaviors such as the pedophilia or the sadism. . 

  • - Homosexuality is due to extra need of sexual activity. These people are wrongly perceived as ultra perverts, as having an ultra potent sexuality that the opposite sex could not cope with. Although homosexuals are generally more active than the normals, however, their libido is not so strong as to feel the need of transition to same-sex partners after, allegedly, having exhausted the opposite sex partners. Not at all. Simply these people are attracted to the opposite sex partners just as the normal ones do not feel attracted to the same sex persons.

  • - The LGBT persons do not threaten to rape same-sex persons. The sexually assault cases against same sex persons are statistically lesser than those of men against women.

The main charge against these people is the abnormality. Of course, you can see a mile away that the sexual relations between two people of the same sex are not normal. They improvise mating organs that have not a biological specific sex role. Yet, such imputation is absurd to me. Even if these relationships are not normal, till this does not mean that they would be benign or harmful. Then, the appeal to normality should not be a criterion for "correction" if this abnormality does not have a visible bad consequence over the other people freedoms or the environment. Everyone should have the right to live a life as her/his wants. After 3,000 years of Western civilization spiritual mutilation, invoking normality is childish. Abnormal is also the very "normal" couples’s sexual life, as everybody knows. Because, if the sexuality role is the reproduction, then the most of human sexual activity is abnormal since it does not meant for reproduction. Most of them practice sexual activities solely for pleasure, and do not want every intercourse to end with a pregnancy. Then, many "normals" use the eccentric sexual behavior for the very need for diversity and refreshing the couple relationship. It is not fair to blame those who practice such fantasies or take them any right. Especially worrying is the fact that a majority decide what is normal, according to their own preferences, but not by following strict criteria of morality or biology. So here is how the "normality" is pretty hard to establish. This is not imputable for itself; it's good for a person to live its life as free as possible, as long as it does not affect the freedom of others or the environment. However, it is absurd to expect everyone to conform to your own personal preferences in art, lifestyle or sexual life.

A second important accusation made against same-sex couples is the eccentric behavior and clothing, especially at the annual parade which they organized in major cities. However it must be stated that, in a inhibitive world, same-sex orientation people feel persecuted and, thus, usually censor their gestures. They explode inside of such a crowd. These things happen also with "normality" if prolonged sexual inhibition. That is, actually, the case for every drive; it will become stronger when previously inhibited. I am not hedonism advocate; I am convinced that some drives must be inhibited. But in this case the proposed social inhibition for sexual minorities is pointless. I am convinced that there are some extreme cases, wanting extra rights form the social system, just for belonging to a sexual minority. I would not agree with that, but anyway, these cases are rare.



The moderate opposition reactions are explained by the extension personal libido outside the couple relationship which we are engaged in, despite the fact that couple members of the have very strong links and even inseparable. In other words, each one is more or less consciously projecting himself/ herself in different movies couples or in different social circles of direct contact or publicized couples. I analyzed in detail this libido dynamics here: http://baldovin.netai.net/acte/Din.psi.abis/texte/tabu.htm#varianta, so no more details here. I brought that up just for sustaining that the "normality" moderate opposition towards same-sex couples is due also to the phantasmatic self projecting reaction into a sexual relationship with such a person, according to this natural libidinal mechanism.

From another point of view, the mainstream society is opposed to sexual behavior that are not involved, only to absurdly broaden wide their choices horizons to a suitable partner. Influenced by the primitive prejudice of the false same sex attractions contagiousness, many prefer to have such a rejection or even hostile attitude towards these people with same-sex orientation.

A serious problem is the vehement opposition to that decision, leading to extreme cases, like that priest that burned himself in protest, or assaulting or killing the homosexuals. Such extreme events made in the name of "normality" fulfill the too much absurdity landscape that exists today in the civilized society. Burning oneself protest and more acts like that are psychopathological cases that proves some special psychical forces involvement. The aggressive repulsion for same-sex couples is largely due to a psychical conflict between one’s sexual impulses and its inner ethical forum, that Freud firstly called "Conscious" and then, "Superego". Freud clearly saw that the vehement rejection, as long as do not come from an extremist mentality (such as Islamic fundamentalists), is due to their repressed tendencies that are then outward projected.

The projection phenomenon, that Freud explains such vehement reactions with, is quite general. I think there are personal factors involved that must be exemplified. Every person libido consists of a concordant libidinal sphere with her/his (physical) sex, and a discordant libidinal sphere, inherited especially from the opposite sex parent. I analyzed this phenomenon in detail here: http://baldovin.netai.net/acte/Din.psi.abis/texte/meta.htm#Libidoului . The concordant libidinal sphere is usually stronger because it receives energy from the genitals. But the opposite-sex parent could have a very powerful libido and send it to its children as psychogenetic inheritance. The sexual behavior of this grew up adult varies depending on this opposite sex parent libido power on the following scale: metatropism, transvestism, transsexualism, bisexualism and exclusive homosexuality (paraphilia), as I detailed here: http://baldovin.netai.net/acte/Din.psi.abis/texte/libidinale.htm .

So, the most of us have the predisposition for sexual behavior directed towards the same sex persons, more or less visible. But most of us do not feel it. However, if we have a closer look to our sexual behavior, we can easily see it. For example, we find moments when we are excited about the women on top position or domination woman who initiate sexual intercourse. Even if these moments could be rare, however our excitement is explained precisely by this discordant libidinal sphere predisposition that, in this case, find common ground with the concordant one.

But when the discordant libidinal sphere are stronger and comes into conflict with the concordant one, there certain personal problems may occur. The psychical discomfort produced by them is due to their association with a fragile period in everyone's life, which is the beginning of adolescence and childhood loss. This age coincides with the genitals development and with starting sending libidinal energy from the instinct to the psychical system. At that moment the libidinal spheres have about the same energetic level, mainly the concordant libidinal sphere is a bit stronger, due to education. But at that moment, the discordant libidinal sphere also receives libidinal energy, so that certain homosexual behavior may occur. For those that have a strong discordant libidinal sphere, the emotional life does not change much from adolescence. They remain adolescents for the rest of their life. For the others, the parenthood can totally change their affective life, so this adolescence period remembrance is a not very pleasant. Therefore, many have this reaction of disgust seeing these couples.

Then, there are those in between these two parts, the nuances. Some have families and a normal sexual life, but the transvestite, transsexual, or bisexual drives, may compulsively appear in their minds. They are the mentioned above vehement voices. Some of them use the religious meditation to calm down the whole psychodynamical energetic system. And, that is why there was possible that extreme case of self-immolation. Others practice them both at the same time, thus finding some emotional balance, as in the case of homosexual monks.

Concerning the anti same-sex marriages ideas, I focus firstly on that who’s saying that the family means a man and a woman and nothing else. There are people that believe that the family means what the official justice says. But the most evaluated mammals raise their babies so that union is a family. Whether it is a single mother family, whether it is made from the both parents, whether it is a group, it is still family. The people who don’t see this reality are stuck in the classical traditional family mentality. But those who are interested in this subject can study the cultural anthropology and see that in the primitive’s man life, the uncle can have the father’s role for the child. So there is primitive family even according to such criteria classical family.

Beyond that, linguistically speaking, a child raised by a single mother can not be called a child without family. The family was not invented by the State or any authority. The invention is an artificial operation and mainly refers to the technology. Sexuality, birth and family are elements of evolution of life on earth. The family is both animal and human nature itself. So there is no need for artificial definitions and objectives provided by legislation for the family. It affirms them before being drawn by a repressive authority. Luckily, in this case, the authorities do not suppress its natural development.

The second idea that had my attention is generalizing the same-sex marriages would end up in human being disappearance, as same-sex couples cannot have babies. But this maternal need for babies, that the men also have, makes them to involve into normal sexual relations. I am firmly convinced that the men maternal complex is enough for humanity to continue to exist as long as there are living conditions on the environment.

Overall, I think this main society reaction against a minority simply explains our current situation, the manipulation, the authorities’ oppression and, ultimately, the slavery, be it classical or waged. Even if not violent towards the sexual minorities, as part of the crowd, the common people does not think that they are persecuted, thus deepening their transgenerational persecutions which, ultimately, have mutilated their mid. The common people think about what is to be earned on short term from such marriage legalization, and thus, prefer to tolerate these abuses. Lack of empathy toward a minority will turn against one’s own person sooner or later, when its rights will be limited or even denied. So, on the term, this retrograde mentality will face the abuses that it allows now.

Nevertheless, I believe that the political decision for providing children for adoption to same sex couples must be more nuanced. The decision of children placement in the same-sex families must be taken into account the child’s interests. There are countries where institutionalized children receive an even better education than that offered by their natural parents. In this case, the child's interest is not to grow up in a same sex family, although, as noted, parents’ sexual orientation does not affect the child sexual orientation after reaching adulthood. Unfortunately, the statistics show that same-sex couples are less stable than the normal ones. Here's another reason why the adoption is not really a viable solution in the western developed countries. But there is another situation in the poor countries, with weak social services for children, corruption, poverty and other issues. In this case, I'm sure that the same sex couple adoptive parents, if having enough material resources, would provide a better future for a child than such a specialized institution. I am also convinced that such a couple from such a country is better family than many 'normal' couples.

Unfortunately, this same sex couple agitation for rights and civil recognition as children adoption and marriage do not relate much to these things. If really would want children, a same sex couple would easily get it. Such a person can find an opposite sex partner with whom to have a kind of contract that clearly stipulates that the child to be raised by it after separation. There are enough people in this world that can make such compromises.

But the problem is another one. As noted in the footnote below, many same sex orientation people have themselves some problem to accept their own sexual impulses, like the main society. So, they project into the world/society their own rejection. At the subliminal level, they see the purpose of that political struggle materialized into a kind of encouragement or prize awarding that the society would give for their sexual choice. This ideal has a personal psychical function: it is meant to counteract this embarrassment feeling that they themselves have. Of course, everyone involved in this political debate should understand that the world will remain indifferent to it, if the marriages of this kind would be accepted. Their mental and emotional discomfort unrest will not particularly end once with the legalization of this kind of marriage or with receiving rights for adoption.

I believe that this pursuit of formalization is blowing in the wind. Although I have deep respect for the family natural institution, I despise the legalized marriage for being an improper state intrusion into personal life. The contract signing between spouses only prolongs the agony of a possible breakup, but it does not ultimately prevent. There are so many spouses who live together but apart ... and this is precisely due to this artificial state's intrusions into the person’s private life, preventing them to find somewhere ele their half. It seems very unnatural to me to ask yourself this, since you should protect yourself from such potential abuse of marriage legal recognition institution.

* For example, the most used psychopathology treated, DSM, has removed long time ago the homosexuality among the sexual behavior disorders. This is mainly due to the medicalist prejudices remnants concerning the mental disorder. These prejudices consider the mental disorder as disease. In some parts of the world the equivalence between mental disorder and (mental) illness is still maintained. DSM's attitude has changed since the last half century ago, but as I mentioned, some prejudices still exist. And the need to treat the "correct" a certain mental disorder is descended from this bias. There is discordant attitude toward homosexuality, when the subject is ashamed to its sexual impulses, and there is discordant attitude, when the subject accepts it without remorse. Well, the discordant homosexuality could be treated in psychotherapy. On the contrary, no need for that in the discordant one’s case. However, even if there is not a therapeutic recommendation for this type of behavior that does not mean that homosexuality should not be recognized as part of the spectrum of sexual behavior disorders, as DSM decided. The transsexualism also does not require psychotherapeutic intervention; so this would never justify this disorder ranging removal from sexual behavior disorders





»»  read more

Postati un comentariu

Nume

E-mail *

Mesaj *

If you want to receive the entries that I write

insert your e-mail address here and then push the button bellow:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Facebook