Lība-Egner’s proposal has received a mixed reaction in society. Some support it, saying – it was a long time ago. How long can this harassment be tolerated, while others openly mock it, pointing out that soon they will not be allowed to look at a woman, because such a look will be considered as harassment.
Before we evaluate both of these extreme visions, it must be said right away that the problem of sexual harassment itself undeniably exists. It can even be very unpleasant and in some cases critically unpleasant. At the same time, this is a vital social issue, the solution of which can easily get carried away, go to extremes and end up in a ditch.
Let’s take the same look. This look can really be openly obscene, offensive to the other party and even very unpleasant. At the same time, by regulating this look, we are approaching totalitarian societies, where every step, every word, every movement must be carefully considered, because it may offend someone’s dignity, someone’s authority, some line of holy scriptures. At the level of criminal responsibility. Do we really want it?
There is another extremely important, purely subjective nuance in this case. The very finding of harassment depends entirely on the woman’s attitude towards the specific “assailant”. When talking about sexual harassment, women mean unwanted harassment. If a woman likes a man, then showing his attention, even with overt elements of harassment, does not cause objections. This subjective evaluation of the potential criminal offense (if the proposal of Lībīnas-Egneres is accepted) creates all the following uncertainties and possible risks. However, society is not only made up of women. There is also another side – men. Their interests should also be taken into account.
Men’s life is only seemingly easier
Two problems appear here from the men’s side. A man cannot know a priori whether the woman likes him or not. Moreover, as life practice shows, there are not so rare cases when a woman does not like a man at all at first, but after getting to know him better and appreciating the man’s boldness and perseverance (which are recognized signs of masculinity), the woman likes him.
The second problem is that, in this way, those men who, for various reasons (most often due to physical unattractiveness or excessive shyness), already find it difficult to make contact with women, are put in an extremely difficult position. They already feel insecure, but when society declares this daring as socially undesirable, they will feel even more depressed with all the consequences that follow. Let’s not forget that the number of male suicides in Latvia exceeds the number of female suicides by six times (in certain age groups even more). Mostly because of problems with the opposite sex.
I have talked a lot with women about these issues and I can say: the absolute majority of women do not even realize how difficult it is for men (especially young ones) to approach a woman, to ask her to a dance, to give her a compliment or even to show affection. Those men who do not have such “complexes”, who know how to “handle freely” with women, are literally on the hook.
Although most modern women are firmly convinced that men have an easier life and have always had it (patriarchal society has oppressed women for thousands of years), the facts do not bear this out.
I have already mentioned the number of suicides. Life expectancy for men is significantly shorter almost everywhere. At least in Western culture. In the settlements occupied during the tribal wars, all male representatives were killed without exception. Warfare itself was also the “exclusive privilege” of men. Everyday fights at school, in the yard, at green balls, where you need to prove yourself. A hundred and more years ago, only men worked 12 hours a day in workshops and mines. Today, men have really lost many of the earlier difficulties, but not those related to sexual relations, because the “last word”, whether to have sex with a man or not, still belongs to women.
In the process of flying around, the woman tests the man
Returning to the proposal of Lībaņa-Egneres, it is important not to get bogged down in individual extreme cases: how will it be possible to get acquainted now? Will it be necessary to fill out a form in advance, to confirm mutual consent with a notary? It is important to speak to the essence, because the written and even more so the unwritten regulation of relations between the sexes determines the long-term prospects of any society.
If only for the reason that it is in such relationships that new members of society are born (children are born) who continue the existence of this society. At an unconscious level, everyone understands this, so any issues related to family and sexual behavior are always treated with special sensitivity. Therefore, when evaluating various proposals in this field, it is important to be aware of the basic principles.
No matter how radical “progressivism” tries to deny gender differences and their binary division, you will not fool nature. Children are born only to women. A woman’s contribution to the birth of a child is incomparable to a man’s contribution, which also determines all the psychological differences between men and women. Nature itself forces a woman to be significantly more responsible in matters of building relationships. Do not engage in casual relationships with anyone (as often happens in homosexual relationships). The invention of contraception has changed a lot, but it cannot undo the genetic programming.
In nature, everything has a meaning. Also for the fly-by process with its initial rejection game. A woman unconsciously tests how serious a man’s interest is, how persistent, decisive, courageous, enterprising, persistent in his feelings he is, because for a woman, a man’s psychological masculinity is much more important than purely physical attractiveness (beauty), which may be of decisive importance at the first moment, but not creating a joint family. One can, of course, regulate, rationalize and remove the aura of romantic ambiguity and uncertainty from this hovering process. Question: is it necessary and what will it do?
Behavioral fashions of the sexes are variable
It should be noted that the view on these issues of gender relations is dynamic and rapidly changing. Until very recently, around the turn of the century, the idea of the archaic nature of emphasizing women’s sexuality, inherited from a patriarchal past, was popular. A slogan was chanted: a woman is not meat, and her human qualities are more important than naked sex appeal. Eye-catching cosmetics, high heels, mini skirts, cleavage and other things emphasizing sexuality were disdained.
In 2004, when I went to Brussels, I was struck by the “ugly” women there, compared to the “beauties” of Riga. But literally in a few years the situation changed radically. Experts say that thanks to the enlargement of the EU and the entry of Eastern European women into Western Europe. Being sexual came back into fashion. At the same time, men’s restrictions in relation to women are increasing.
Admittedly, this process has its own natural meaning. In this way, the male individuals that are worthless from the point of view of continuation of the species are additionally screened out. It must always be remembered that, from a demographic point of view, the number of men in the population has absolutely no significance. Children are born only to women, but one man can impregnate a thousand women. In order to avoid misunderstandings, here we are talking only about the narrow demographic (species continuation) aspect.
Normally in nature (forest, savannah, jungle) no more than 20% to 40% of male animals get to mate. Most males spend their entire lives without sexual contact. Human monogamy is a huge advantage for men, because thanks to it, 60% of “good for nothing” men get their second halves. If you ask any high school girl, they will say: we have three or four normal guys in our class, the rest are nothing. This also gives rise to the common stories about the superiority of the number of women over men, although the opposite is true in age groups up to 50 years old.
Taking into account the principle of the pendulum of human development, we are currently approaching the extreme of male sexual restriction in the issue under consideration. Women can walk and appear in public places almost naked, they can defiantly shove their feminine charms literally in a man’s nose, but he must control himself, be able to control all his instincts and hide his sexual desire, as in 2004, according to the feminist guidelines of the time, did the women of Brussels.
As I mentioned, these central “guidelines” change very rapidly. This is also understandable, because sexual issues are extremely important in people’s lives. Perhaps even the most important, although today’s “guidelines” deny this.
I do not believe in voluntary solutions to these issues. Society itself, experimenting and experiencing different models, will arrive at the most favorable solution, which will never be final. The movement, development or march in a circle will never end. Therefore, hasty amendments to the legislation should not be adopted.
We already have strong enough laws against physical sexual violence, but when it comes to “insults to dignity”, society is doing well on its own. With its own unwritten laws. At least the recent scandal of the Music Academy has brought significant corrections in the relationship between students and teachers (and not only them), so that each side understands what it can and cannot afford. Life itself puts everything in its place, so littering the legislation with excessive pettiness is not the most desirable practice.
Be the first to find out what interesting has happened in Latvia and the world by joining us on the Telegram or Whatsapp channel
Tags: pendulum sexual relations approaching extreme male restraint
-
