In America, many women – especially
the feminist kind – disliked me. I came to the conclusion that the
reason for that was conflict of expectations. Both my mother and my
grandmother were superwomen, and I got used to female beauty and
goodness without myself being especially attractive physically or
personally. So many women saw me as a bottom-feeder.
However I did have things to offer the
women that I was with. One was affection and passion. Another was
appreciation. Another was quite good poetry. Another was addressing
their concerns. And of course when I was making good money in the
computer industry I had that to offer as well.
One benefit of this state of affairs is
that bad women avoided me. I did not have what they wanted. The women
I did attract were the artistic and philosophical kind. As such,
these were frequently accused of being crazy or evil. However they
were all beautiful, intelligent and exciting. Some lived in mansions
and some have been homeless; but all were amazing as romantic
partners. And all had experienced completely unfair mistreatment.
They, like me, were the romantic type.
In contemporary society the romantic women become punching bags, and
the romantic men get treated as criminals. We all had a strong
influence from Romantic poetry and literature. We applied the
concepts to things in our lives. It worked when we found one another.
The result, besides beautiful shares, was also good poetry and art on
both sides.
Now romantic attitudes have come under
a lot of criticism. Apparently it is unrealistic, narcissistic or
childish. It is not narcissistic; it is about valuing the other
person rather than about valuing yourself. It is not unrealistic;
people's convictions have a large role in shaping the reality of
their lives, and people who base their actions on such beliefs make
these beliefs a part of social reality. Nor is it childish; I have
known marriages that started with love at first sight and were going
strong when the partners were in their 80s.
Then there is the claim that it is
antisocial. Do not tell that to the World War II generation. They
built a very successful society while in many cases basing their
matches on romantic love. Maybe such things become antisocial in
societies that want to snuff them out; but societies do not have to
be that way.
Another claim is that it is nature's
way to get you to do its bidding. Is that such a bad thing? Is it a
bad thing furthermore that such matches should lead to marriage and
family? Most people will want to have families. Most people will want
to have children. It is much better that this be done within the
context of a relationship where people love one another than within a
relationship in which people do not.
Probably the most ridiculous claim I've
heard on the subject is that it is misogynistic. That claim is a Big
Lie. That claim is precise inversion of truth. A misogynist is
somebody who hates women. A man who writes poetry for women is not a
misogynist; he is the opposite of a misogynist. He is a man who loves
women, or at least the women for whom he writes poetry. To claim
anything to the contrary is absurd.
Then there is the claim that the people
who are attracted to such things are narcissists or sociopaths or
perverts, and that these people can't love. Even ones who can't feel
love – as we are told about sociopaths - can choose to act in a
loving manner. Use your mind for what your heart fails to do. As for “narcissists” and
“perverts,” many of them do very much love. Ayn Rand is regarded
as narcissistic, but she was passionately in love more than once. And
of course many of the people who were involved in 1920s and 1960s
would be now regarded as perverts, but many of them were very loving,
as we see for example in the Great Gadsby, the Beat poetry and Pink
Floyd.
When something is under attack in
society, its manifestations are at a disadvantage. This reinforces
the false claim that there is something wrong with it. Especially
when partners are young, inexperienced and not versed in social
manipulation, their relationships can be easily poisoned or destroyed
by people versed in such things. This leads to situations such as the
one that I had in 1995, when I passionately loved a woman only to
have her stepmother tell her that I was using her. Completely untrue,
but it appears that she believed it. Some say that love is the most
powerful force in the universe, but in fact love is quite fragile.
Its value is its beauty, not its power, and the correct place for
power is to protect the love.
One thing that I have seen in some situations is what I call the Iago behavior. Sometimes a man would genuinely love a woman, only to have his bar buddies or his family stuff his head with paranoid nonsense and convince him that the woman is doing the wrong thing or that the woman is evil. In many case these people would claim that the man owed it to other men or even to God to tramp women down. This would destroy even the most loving relationships and lead them to become abusive. Then of course the feminists would look at this behavior and say that it means that men are evil or that love is a racket. In fact the problem was neither with men nor with love. The problem was with the ugliness that surrounded them and which was more experienced than were they.
I want to see romantic love vindicated
and becoming a fertile ground for better family life. This will
create better family situations. As for the people with strong
romantic influence, it will give them a reason to live and to excel,
bringing into the civilization a rightfully disaffected constituency.
I want people growing up now to avoid
situations such as what I had in 1995. To that effect I offer my
arguments on the subject. Use these arguments to defend your
relationships and make your relationships blossom for life.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home