To be or to seem? Bashny.Net

Nine million three hundred eighty nine thousand six hundred sixty one



Today, the social networks came across a discussion my friend and her friends talked about "female weakness." It all started with the fact that she wrote what she feels vulnerable at the moment without a man, and in the comments it started to convince that this is good, because men like weak women, next to which it is possible to think that they are stronger, smarter, etc. And you know what? I'm sick of this position.

Of course, the image of "strong women" runs like a red thread through the history of our country in the last hundred years, although examples can be found in all times and in all cultures. Of course, a woman — being an adaptable nature quietly taught to carry burdens, hard to swing, bassinet, wash, darn, iron on the head, to the Breasts, to pass through itself and children's tears, and men's fatigue, and quirks of aging parents…

But it is extremely foolish to try to measure who is stronger, man or woman? We are strong in different ways, it is incomparable. The strong man physically (because, for example, goes to war), and the woman are strong in their faith and love (and waiting for him or going after him). The strong man with its rationality (and maybe more successful to control financial matters), and woman — its emotional (bringing in all the occasion, making out of nothing "hat, salad...", and about the scandal now won't, the flip side of the fireworks).

Competitions end where begin to respect their strengths, to recognize the less fortified positions, thanking the partner for "cover" in them and, in turn, support him where he's not very focused.

For many years women in Russia had to play not the role of women, now desperately sought a new form. And then, I think we need to clearly separate: where the voice takes the ego, where abilities and talents, where laziness and fear.

Because that's the position, "let him think that all decisions in the family accepts it, hahaha" — duplicity and manipulation, enjoying her secret power. And possibly even a woman's desire to withdraw from the area in which the area of the development is always a little scary. Where there are two adults, decisions will be made jointly and/or will be divided into zones of influence.

What about "seem dumber, weaker men, because he is nice"... I cause stupor this wording: all my life "seem" to be themselves in order to please someone, even if it is a man to love? What's the problem? Keep him? So what? To continue to be themselves and to live their lives?

Of course, for a relationship with a certain type of men this game is good (I was so, what can we say), some people can't stand female strength, wisdom, power. But it is unlikely that such a man would be a woman to hold for a long time, she will run away because it's just an unpleasant feeling — constantly artificially "decrease" next to it, to hide its best features, so that, God forbid, the man felt a twinge of pride and did not find the fact that he, too, in some matters it is necessary to grow.

It is interesting that in the comments one girl gave a link to an article about how to be with a successful man (by a man too). Although I have no problem with that, you still clicked the link: something overlooked? First, in the text it was, no matter how trivial, about the importance of the appearance of women next to status man. Well, you can understand. Although I personally not the first to ignore high heels and neat installation, and it still did not prevent anything. But okay, let's say.

Read more: "the Woman — one of the achievements of men. And it should not be lost on the background of a new car or apartment. Otherwise it will go to another." Clearly. This closed the page.

And here is the question (leave only one of the masses): why is the article about how a woman has a "stretch" to fit their successful man — it is quite a common phenomenon, but the fact that the man often in fact also have something to learn from it, no one is saying?

Once upon a time I said to his beloved: see, partner is the Master. Assuming that you don't know something, don't know how to be attentive, there is much good to learn from each other. There must be something in the other person developed better and the fact of his presence inspires you or what kind of situation encourages the development. Then the relationship becoming a wonderful school for personal and spiritual growth, not only in the area of comfort and safety (which is also important, of course).

By the way, this can be a great check on the adequacy of men, whether he is ready to accept a woman for who she is, with her intelligence, experience, professionalism, independence? No one says that you have logs to drag, but not to play the fool, if you are able to handle new technical devices, or the orientation of the terrain in an unfamiliar city. To hide it all, trying to please man, is equal to not even dance to his tune, no!.. Dance to the tune of his ego. To deprive him of the opportunity to see their complex features. Yes, to see them uncomfortable, in extreme cases, it can really motivate you to care — but what man? Who is not willing to develop. And most importantly, then, because you always have to do is "shrink" the most, keep the man in the illusion of his power. Again, for what?

And two words about the the adequacy. We're not all superheroes, life provides sufficient field for the activity of both of the pair. And if a woman is not pretending to be stupid in matters where it is competent, still there are topics in which man can prove himself to earn two to do a man's job around the house, to interact with children, provide psychological support for beloved or something.

So let's not keep their men for the self-righteous idiots and restrict each other in development. Love dance of the two personalities. And the more holistic, sincere and courageous, the more beautiful the dance.published 

 

P. S. And remember, just changing our mind, we together change the world! ©

Source: /users/9001