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

This article continues the previous one

Click aici pentru varianta in limba romana

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.

Gabriel Baldovin