womensecr.com
  • Disharmony of the human body and sexual feelings

    Let's recall the history of relations between two schoolchildren, the heroes of the Yugoslav film, and the one entitled: "It's time to love". This film was very popular in its time, because there is confidence that most of you know its collision. In a nutshell, I recall the content of the picture: a girl and a boy, high school students, met at dances, fell in love, as they say, at first sight. Relations developed in the rhythm of modern dance: violently, unrestrainedly and recklessly. And now the payment: pregnancy, abortion, despair of parents, teachers condemnation, attempts to separate lovers. And - a happy ending: a wedding, graduation, departure with a construction team.

    Do you think, could such relationships of teenagers do without drama, without suffering? !And surely the story should have ended so safely? Convinced: suffering was programmed from the beginning. It is inappropriate and untimely to have adult relationships among those who attend a children's institution, such as the secondary school, from those who do not have the social status of independent adults.

    And yet: they did not allow time for their feelings to mature, grow from an unconscious attraction to true love, which, as you remember, is based on a friendly disposition and respect - feelings that do not suddenly appear, at first sight.

    Usually, in such cases my opponents vigorously refer to the example of Romeo and Juliet and other examples of the great and eternal, instant love almost adolescents. Objection suggests statistics: among those who were familiar before the wedding for less than a month, the highest percentage of divorces. Long-lasting love at first sight - a lucky chance, a rare luck. In my presence, the employees of the registry office dissuaded the young couple from getting married: they looked at how the enthusiastic enthusiasm for the first impulse escaped from the first difficulties of living together.

    And finally, it's time to stop using the example of Romeo and Juliet, if only because "there is no sadder story in the world" than the tale of their love. It lasted for a moment, and it is not known how the family relations would have developed for this couple, resolving the conflict between the parents as well as it ended in the Yugoslav film.

    Our young contemporaries, the heroes of this film, have undergone heavy trials, which would surely be avoided by truly young people who truly love and have a certain culture of feelings. A schoolgirl was supposed to have a child. And her lover, overshooting, throws her words - alas!- so familiar in their cruelty: your, they say, is a concern. And let him then rushes, seeks ways to get money for abortion, despairs when he learns about the tragic consequences of the operation( his girlfriend will not have children!) - all this, to be sure, will not seriously correct anything. They have already laid the first stone on the grave of their love.

    Well, they were married in the end, well, they left their parents to distant lands. And what of it? Where will they go from their own memory? And she will revive them all: his impatience, her quick agreement( that's the basis for outwardly unreasonable jealousy), his cowardice and betrayal, her, though temporary, disgust( that's the reason for disrespectful suspicion).Further - more - the children's problem will arise. She will long for them and blame them for not having a husband. He can, because of the lack of children, decide to marry another woman. Or, if he does not dare to take such a step, he will secretly and eternally suffer, also accusing his wife: she could not restrain his impulse!

    We must admit that in this film adults, parents and teachers were no more prepared for this kind of situation than teenagers. As if we, growing up, really forget our experiences of this difficult age.

    The great Russian physiologist II Mechnikov in the last century drew attention to the disharmony of the human body and sexual feelings. He wrote that the child is not at all adaptable for reproduction, and yet the sexual feeling in him is so isolated that he gets the opportunity to abuse it. What happens? Three points, which by their very essence must necessarily coincide - sexual desire, sexual satisfaction and reproduction, are separated from each other in intervals of several years. A girl of ten years is able to strive to become a wife, she is able to become a wife only at sixteen, and become a mother - not before twenty!

    Here is another explanation why the feelings and attitudes of a person must necessarily be regulated by consciousness and moral rules and correlated with a certain age and gender. And it would have been necessary for ten-year-old girls to recognize the right to adult relationships, because the feelings they can have are very strong. And at the same time, the young men, even when physically they seem to be fully matured for paternity, may feel completely immature, boyish.

    But at the same time, many mothers of young men, like the carefree parent from the film we are analyzing, believe that all the worries and worries about the relations of adolescents are on the conscience of the girl's parents: let them say that they are following their child more. Children do not have children.

    It's hard to agree with this. Children appear because of the frivolity of their sons more often than because of the frivolity of the girls. They are trying to keep, to discourage their friends from crossing the line of intimacy. But young men, as a rule, demand from them "proofs" of love. And having received them, they do not consider it compulsory to prove the same by their responsible attitude to the consequences of love. The real adulthood, as we know, is determined not so much by feelings, even by deeds, as by the ability and willingness to respond for both, and for another.

    These are physiological and psychological contraindications for early sexual relations. Social lies in the fact that the current adolescents are neither financially nor professionally independent, entirely dependent on their parents. So, according to conscience, they do not have the right to decide their own destiny without the participation of elders. Otherwise, it will be a violation of the original family code, a diversion against the parents. As against teachers: adult relationships are relevant in the adult team. This also needs to be understood.

    But who of the heroes of the film and the like thinks at this age of such a development of events? They did not look into the distance, they did not intend to create a family. This marriage, let's face it - forced. Although young people assure themselves that they have joined consciously and voluntarily.

    Unfortunately, quite often a phenomenon occurs when the first child appears at the young spouses not at will and mature solution.

    Forced marriage, an unexpected child, what can be sadder at the beginning of family life? No, not from hypocrisy, not from addiction to conservative attitudes, adults continue to repeat to modern girls and boys about the necessity of strict morals, endurance, conscientiousness, shame. All these properties are part of the universal spiritual culture, which we are called upon to cherish and improve.

    Famous in the beginning of XX century. Austrian researcher, the author of the once famous book "Sex and Character" Otto Weininger claimed that in some regions of the Western civilized world with a certain cyclicality there is a movement of feminists, supporters of the so-called women's equality. In their behavior, along with masculine virtues - determination, firmness of character, fearlessness - there are also purely male vices: a propensity for drunkenness, debauchery in words, manners and deeds, irresponsible attitude to the offspring. Even in appearance, women seem to renounce everything female: tighten, hide, disfiguring the chest, tighten the figure so that the hips do not catch sight. They take from men all the attributes - clothes, shoes, habits.

    At some point, the feminist movement goes to extremes: the birth rate begins to decline, public mores fall, adversely affecting the state foundations. Usually women themselves are the first to remember and open a new movement: for the regulation of sexual relations, for the strictness of the rules. An understanding comes: the morality of a nation is first of all cherished by a woman. And if she refuses to be staunch and decent, farewell to morals.

    The true female revolution had a different essence and other forms of manifestation. This is how F. Engels wrote about this in his book The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State: the transition from group marriage, from indiscriminate connections, from "sinful conception" to "monogamy was accomplished chiefly by women. The more with the development of economic conditions of life, consequently, with the decomposition of ancient communism and the increase in population density, the inherited relations between the sexes lost their naive primitive character, the more they should appear to women to be humiliating and burdensome;the more insistently women were to seek, as deliverance, the right to chastity, to temporary or permanent marriage with only one man. From men, this step could not come forward, among other things, simply because they have never, even up to the present time, thought of abandoning the conveniences of an actual group marriage. Only after women had made the transition to a twin marriage, men were able to introduce a strict monogamy( monogamy.- TA), of course, only for women "(Marx, K., Engels, F., Works, Vol. 21, p.56).

    Note: F. Engels - a determined opponent of gender inequality - speaks of the "right to chastity" suffered by women as a step forward. And certainly does not call for equality in vice.

    Further, Engels writes: "The first class contrast in history coincides with the development of antagonism between husbands and wives under monogamy, and the first class oppression coincides with the male enslavement of the male. Monogamy was a great historical progress, but at the same time it opens. .. the era that is still going on, when all progress at the same time means relative regress, when the well-being and development of some are realized at the cost of suffering and suppression of others "(Ibid., P.68-69).

    But why did the woman find "disorderly and painful" promiscuous sexual relations for herself, why did she demand monogamy, and then for so long one agreed to carry his strap?

    It seems that the most considerate women, even in ancient times, caught the law: healthy, hunted, lucky offspring of the mother, to which the man is firmly attached - father, worker, earner and defender. Now, no one doubts the advantages of a strong family in the upbringing of children, in the management of the economy, even in professional achievements.(Recent research shows the direct dependence of every person's prosperity - in matters, in creativity, health - on family harmony.)

    It turns out that for centuries women have reconciled themselves to moral inequality, too, in the name of the good of children, strange as it may seem. Because without science they realized: the behavior of the mother responds to the well-being of the offspring more than the behavior of the father. That's why the daughters were brought up in greater rigor than their sons.

    The nature of moral norms and rules was not something given to all people from the beginning and forever. There were different customs from different peoples: there were supporters of polygamy and polyandry, even adherents of celibacy. But it was the presence of ordered links that indicated whether this tribe had come out, this people from a state of savagery or is still in it.

    However, now we can face such a phenomenon: a society that has reached a high flowering of science, technology, art, falls into a state of savagery in the field of sexual relations. An example is the "sexual revolution" that has spread in the West, which, according to some of its apologists, should contribute to the destruction of age-old inequality in the relations of the sexes, the erection of the elemental forces of love in the rank of science. To achieve these goals, the mass media were involved, which opened fire on such human qualities as shame, shyness, modesty, fidelity, declaring them philistine, hypocritical manifestations, alien to the enlightened and free-thinking person. It was believed that sexual education of young people is enough to build a happy family.

    The distribution of literature and films that not only took off the mysterious covers from the intimate relations of men and women, but also savored details propagandizing the "technology of sex", led to the fact that the "enlightened" youth began to show a tendency to all kinds of perversions,this soil, not to mention the sharp increase in venereal. More and more young men and women do not want, and can not build normal family relations.

    According to some reports, from half to 2/3 of divorces in England, Japan and the United States occur, among other reasons, due to sexual dissatisfaction with partners or other violations in the sexual sphere. Denmark, France and the Federal Republic of Germany are the focus of this "science and practice," flooding the world market with the relevant "popular and scientific" literature. And it is precisely in these countries that the level of fertility and the stability of marriages leave much to be desired.

    The fall of public and family morals is said with great concern by all honest people in these countries. In France and the FRG, the press calls "social suicide" supporters of the "sexual revolution".There is nothing new in it, especially revolutionary.

    Corruption, used to be, cold-blooded Science was famous for love, Himself about himself everywhere trumpet And enjoying not loving. But this important amusement is worthy of the old monkeys of the Gracious grandfather ages. ..

    You see, for AS Pushkin, the "science of love" put into the service of debauchery, "is worthy of the old monkeys".

    And now, with a mass of materially provided people of the West, like the elite of all times, thoughtless, unrestrained consumerism creates a stereotype that builds the whole system of human behavior, including in the intimate sphere. In the same way as a car( furniture, clothes, jewelry, toys) is replaced, without special need, before it gets old and bored, the "partner" changes in family or just a life together. Naturally, the weaker people are connected with each other, the easier this shift takes place. And most of all men and women, husband and wife, are connected by common children. They require persistence, decency, loyalty. If so, they refuse not from what prevents the birth and education of children, refuse. .. from themselves. Moreover, with universal replacement of native children you will not be replaced by others, more "fashionable, modern, more comfortable and pleasant," and these are the properties that are the highest values ​​for any thing, any value.

    The fetish of replacement( treason) as the main sign of the prosperity of the person or family - this is what determines the style and morality of the behavior of many representatives of wealthy circles in bourgeois society today. Negation of permanence as a symbol of conservatism, backwardness of views became for them a kind of a sign of "modernity".Any constancy. In all. In friendship. In cooperation. In love. In a relationship. This is the first reason for the revelry of sexual anarchy( but not revolution) in the capitalist world, witnessed by our generation.

    The second reason is no less tangible and significant - the absence of a restraining and regulating principle in people's behavior, the lack of clear and moral goals of their existence.

    It can be admitted that the capitalist countries are now experiencing a severe moral crisis. The regulating effect of religion is weakening, and a high idea for which a person is called upon to restrain gross desires and passions, for whose sake he would voluntarily assume obligations that limit his consumer appetites in all spheres, such an idea does not exist in bourgeois society.

    So it rushes from one extreme to another: from the prohibitions of enlightenment of youth in matters of intimate relations to the raging of porn art;and from him - in the opposite direction, when there are castes that take a vow, asceticism and celibacy. Recently, there are signs that sobering is occurring in Western countries. In Sweden, the government bought up all pornographic publications and forbids their subsequent distribution.(This is after this country gave an example to everyone of the propaganda of permissiveness, full of "freedom of love.") But it is not by administrative measures alone to solve such a complex problem as the moral education of the younger generation. We need moral ideals, illuminated and supported by science and art. True, in the ranks of progressive youth of the West in recent years a movement "for a new chastity" arose, simply for a healthy sex relationship.

    In our society, the very idea of ​​the emancipation of the sexes was formulated differently from the very beginning. When the socialist revolution crushed the bourgeois system, and along with it the bourgeois family, three directions in inter-sex relations were revealed.

    Supporters of one with their slogan proclaimed "free love" and declared war on shame. VI Lenin, NK Krupskaya and many true Marxists strongly opposed them, who convincingly argued that the debauchery of morals had never had anything in common with genuine revolutionary character, as petty-bourgeois hypocrisy had nothing in common with Marxism.

    VI Lenin warned against flirting with all-knowing, all-forgiving. He believed that the proclamation of "freedom from marriage", as a rule, arises from "the desire to justify. .. your own abnormal or excessive sex life and to seek tolerance for yourself"( Memoirs of VI Lenin, Moscow, 1975, vol.5, p.42).

    Protesting against the slogan of "free love," Lenin said that in bourgeois society they understand freedom from serious adultery, in love, from childbirth. For communists, "freedom of love" can only mean freedom from material( financial) calculations and cares, from proprietary and religious prejudices, from the prohibition of parents, "from the bonds of law, the court and the police."Not a fleeting passion, not a vulgar and dirty marriage without love, but a civil marriage with love - this is the position of the Communists in this matter.

    Another mass current was represented by those who blindly preserved the established charter of family life for centuries. And not the wedding, even "not painted" in the registry office lived by traditional commandments.

    The third, they were then a minority, consciously accepted the hardships of searching for new forms of relationships that would be built on the basis of high morality, and not on fear of "gay fiery", before condemning the neighbors. They sought to build a personal life after the model and likeness of the communist social ideal, according to which progress is impossible while preserving the oppression of one person by another.

    In our country, the Leninist ideal of family and love was confessed: commitment to eternal values, equal for both sides, fostering a deep respect for a woman, increasing her role in society and in the family, turning a man into a reliable support, a loyal friend with the sameobligations to his wife that she is in front of him.

    A true revolution in inter-sex relations is evidenced by the change in the status of women in our country during the lifetime of just one generation. First of all, the woman received freedom of choice. The choice of everything: education, professional, social and domestic activities, choice of spouse, choice to be a mother or not. However, the more freedom we use, the more we realize: how important is the differentiation of sex education. Therefore, we do not tire of repeating about women's and men's dignity, the need for the formation of these qualities of the individual.

    What does natural science tell us? Our great compatriot I. I. Mechnikov in the famous "Etudes about the nature of man" wrote: in humans "the internal genital organs point to a certain degree to the genus origin. In men, there are remains of female genital organs. .. On the contrary, women have traces of male genital organs. "

    Endocrinologists will say that each of us has a hormonal "set" of both sexes. By men or women, we are dominated by hormones and properties that are determined by the sex of the most common. Similarly, in behavior, character, intellect, it is impossible to name features and properties inherent exclusively and absolutely to one of the sexes. You can talk only about the predominantly female or masculine attribute.

    As IS Kon writes: "... the same brain can contain programs for both male and female behavior."This "oboedocality" provides us with high plasticity, adaptability to the changing conditions of life, allows women to take on themselves male labor and responsibilities in critical turns of history, and men to women.

    Yes, but then why there is a sexual division of properties and qualities, if they are inherent in all people in one way or another?

    Those properties that are traditionally revered as feminine, apparently, were formed due to the fulfillment of maternal duties. Communicating with the newborn, raising children, the mother develops such spiritual qualities as tolerance and patience, kindness, compassion, dedication, gentleness and tenderness. And the more a man received maternal love, care in infancy, the more necessary and more valuable to him these qualities in his wife. After all, with them the idea of ​​a "perfect woman" is associated with an adult. The eternal son of a woman is what a man sees in all ages. Is he a child, a husband or a brother, this is a particular, still a son!

    What about in the future? Again I address myself to the scholar IS Kon: "Many American and West European sociologists and psychologists predict that the male and female social roles in the future will be absolutely identical. Let the real possibilities of both sexes turn out to be much more plastic and wider than previously thought. It does not follow from this that the sexual division of labor is completely devoid of biological grounds. "

    And further IS Kon, in fact, expresses confidence that no social changes will affect the biological characteristics of the female body, will not abolish maternal functions and all that we call the ideal of femininity. But for its further cultivation it is necessary to observe differences in the education of boys and girls.

    This is the solution to a complex, intricate problem: with understanding, careful attitude to everything that nature has planted in us, not to destroy and break it for the sake of temporary prosperity, but not to rely entirely on it alone, meaningfully develop what is recognized as a special virtue of sexand personality.

    Unreasonable, excessive infatuation with the leveling of the sex turns around for society a considerable moral loss. And hardly anyone wants to be a middle-class creature: neither that, nor this, without knowledge and understanding of one's essence, of its earthly purpose.

    Where sometimes there can be a "holy ignorance" of the differences in the behavior of young men and women, one can show by the example of one criminal process.(Infinite legal laws do not consider ignorance sufficient grounds for justifying a crime, because sometimes young people face trial, even without suspecting that they committed criminal acts.)

    So, the investigation is over. There is a trial. Participants in the process were teenagers - high school students, yesterday's buddies and girlfriends.

    In those days, the girls and boys became on the different sides of the Weights of Themis. Some are young defendants, defendants;others are victims. The defendants were involved in one of the gravest crimes - rape.

    Members of the court found neither witnesses what happened, nor victims of remorse or anger against rapists. The girlfriends even shed tears when the convoy led the convicts away.

    It turned out that the "victims" were drunk before meeting with the "rapists".By their own will and hunt, they brought themselves to a state where everything else was already in the semi-conscious state of the "parties."So there was no violence, there was no resistance. That's why I'm quoting the words "victims" and "rapists".

    Judges vainly appealed to the sense of female dignity of some and the male chivalry of others. And the girls did not hide that they have a vague idea of ​​women's dignity and that the consequences of maternal weaknesses, vices, severely affect the offspring.

    Correspondent Member of the Academy of Medical Sciences of the USSR NP Napalkov argues that women who smoke during pregnancy, subject the future child to cancer. Drinking girl( future mother) brings misfortune to her offspring right up to the seventh tribe, according to biblical expression. The same is true of promiscuity. And the court in this case defended the girls from their own ignorance, lack of culture. Because he saw in them potential mothers, whose body is the highest creation of nature - should not serve as a tool for a minute and muddy desire, an instrument for questionable entertainment. In them, the court defended mothers, whose most important and beautiful earthly post to give the world not only physically, but also morally healthy offspring.

    Many articles of the Constitution have been sent to protect maternity. Thus, the recruitment of young men and women in some educational institutions is uneven, while others for girls are completely closed, such as military and naval schools, although no one doubts that many modern girls will have the ability and physical ability to master military disciplines, to makehardship of service. And they do not take coal into mines. And to retire before men for five whole years. And in legal disputes about the divorce and division of children and property, usually legal bodies Accept the side of the mother's wife, despite the fact that it could be the root cause of the collapse of the family.

    For the same reason more and more cultivated careful, respectful, sympathetic attitude to the woman, her concerns and needs in production.

    All the advantages are given to a woman solely for the maternal mission! And who pretends to be honored, not fulfilling the main duty or performing it carelessly, should know for sure: demands not according to rank and merit.

    Thus, there are two stereotypes of the emancipation of the sexes. Some have chosen the slogan: "Equal treatment for a man!" The educational, professional level of supporters of this type of equality, undoubtedly, rises to an unprecedented height, but purely feminine qualities are sometimes lost. This leads to a prolonged, exhausting and fruitless "war of the sexes" for sharing or redistributing privileges, comfort, but not responsibility for love and peace, for honor and dignity.

    Another way is chosen by those who do not perceive emancipation as a movement for a leader or even as a movement of the sexes towards each other, but as a joint movement to the heights of their own development, to become a perfect woman-wife-mother and perfect husband-husband-father. The second way, obviously, is more humane and favorable. Both for the individual and for society.

    What does all this imply? That a woman, as before, should be forbidden something that from time immemorial forgiven a man?

    On the contrary: it should not be permissible for a man to be forbidden for centuries by a woman. Only in this case, equality will be built not on common vices, but on common virtues. Such a perspective is drawn by the imagination of all the guardians of the human good. Yes, there can not be another: an immoral man corrupts a woman and children, sows evil seeds, which sometimes give abundant shoots.

    We do not establish a kingdom of honor and justice if we become reconciled to the vices in our own home. But the struggle for the moral ideal is no less complicated than the struggle for the implementation of social ideas. Often the best intentions and feelings turn into misfortunes for many people. I bring to your attention the confession of the young soul, which can give impetus to new reflections.

    "I am 21 years old. My fate is a bit unusual. Apparently, my mom is right, she called me a fanatic. In 18 years I met by chance, by correspondence with the prisoner, who still had to sit for 6 more years. Correspondence began. I was eager to help him to take the right path. In letters we argued with him, reasoned. He turned out to be a fairly clever man( he is 10 years older than me).I had a friend who shared with me all the joys and hardships. Together we read his letters. He knew how to dream, suffer, cry and laugh in letters. And I. .. fell in love. That's how it seemed to me. He made me an offer. And I at 19 years married, having signed with him "in the zone".

    Imagine what was happening at home! But I stood it. We saw each other every six months, corresponded often. A year later, I "woke up" and realized that I did not like him. We started to quarrel. So all and went. I do not know whether this could have lasted long, but then what happened was what I least expected. I met a man and fell in love with him. I fell in love so that it became very scary. True love has come to me, which only once is given to man. And in this I was not mistaken. He warmed my soul, taught me to rejoice and laugh again. It seems that all is well. But then I realized that I was in a vicious circle. What to do? Throw my husband away? But I have everything in his world. Stay with him? But I do not know how to lie. .. That's when my happiness began to pour out in tears.

    All the girlfriends said that I should pity my husband and stay with him. Even my mother decided so. Understand me: maybe I'm really selfish, ruthless. But I thought about myself. I am 20 years old. And I have to pay all my life for the mistake. My beloved friend turned away from me. And I, shameless, regretted myself, the person I love, and my future children.

    And I found strength in myself, not listening to anyone, as before, to take a divorce. Of course, it was not easy to decide on this. Flour even write about it.

    But that's what I'm telling all this. The man I love is married. More precisely, he was not officially divorced from his wife, although he did not live with her. He filed for divorce, and we decided to live together without having registered. I knew that he had a five-year-old daughter. But he hid that there was also a five-month-old son. When it opened, I roared days and nights. I invited him to part, I wanted to leave my native city. But he said he would go with me.

    I consulted with his relatives. Everyone unanimously insisted that only with me he began to live peacefully, felt happy. And I was ready to give everything to him. But our happiness is bitter. It's sad that there are two children without a father. I cry at night with pain in my soul because of strangers to me people. Do not think that I'm building a nobility of myself. All friends and friends say that I have orphaned his children. Probably, they are right. But children would be happy if their father lied to them, lived in captivity. .. Of course, it's easy for me to reason. And her, his wife, what is with two children?

    I happened to meet her. What did she say to me! But I do not blame her, I understand her. But it hurts me especially that she curses my child who was not yet born. Him for what?

    Should I return my father's children? So, take it from my own child? This is something I'm not so scared. I think that the child, when he grows up, will understand me. But I myself can not live without my beloved. I realize that children are very expensive in life, but it's also difficult to deprive yourself of happiness in 20 years. Probably, I'm really selfish. I always waited for love as a miracle and never thought that my love and my happiness would be so bitter. What should I do now? Svetlana K. »

    You probably agree with me that this letter can not leave anyone indifferent. There are so many contradictory feelings and thoughts, so much pain and hope that a whole story would suffice. But this is not literature, it is life. And the suffering is real, not paper. You see how dearly Svetlana and her entourage get such a natural, from her point of view, freedom of feeling and independence in deeds. I fell in love with the "rejected", went to meet my attraction, stepping over the protests of my mother."Woke up" from this feeling - can not pretend and does not want. He leaves, again without looking back at the human trial, at the loss of his beloved friend, that because of her apostasy, even the one whom she wanted to raise lower still lower.

    And the new love brings only misfortunes. Svetlana wants happiness with her beloved and with her beloved, but this does not coincide with the well-being of his children and her future child. And what kind of peace and harmony will they have, when there is a house nearby, where curses will be constantly sent to the most dear people?

    A young woman, almost a girl, decides everything herself, of course, she will pay for everything herself. A complete measure. I, for example, was shaken by the casual phrase: "Can I still return my father's children?" She really believes herself to be omnipotent and omnipotent: "take", "give up," "return the man."That's where the burden of unimaginable must be - the consciousness of such a possibility and responsibility! And she is not afraid.

    In this confession it is not known what is more - selflessness or selfishness, frivolity or concern for everyone who has fallen under the wheels of "true" her love. And after all the fate of Svetlana is not externally ordinary. In fact, her problems are the torments of so many who betray the old friend, the old love, who builds new love on the wreckage of the former happiness.

    How Svetlana does, it's hard to predict. Even more difficult to advise her. But one thing is clear: her very experiences, the impossibility of the carefree existence of "lucky ones who found each other", are evidence in favor of our common morality. The anxiety of the soul for the fate of the loved ones, the care of children, not only about their own, but also about the strangers, is a sign that even young and inexperienced women and young people like Svetlana and her friends need to unite eternally arguing feelings: love and duty,thirst for personal well-being and conscientious living.

    Such is the general outline of the problem of educating a culture of feelings and inter-sex relations. But even this brief presentation gives a sufficient idea of ​​the complexity of the task that we all have to solve: to get rid of our thoughts, feelings, actions from everything that we, the older and younger, women and men, disunite, oppose to each other, from everything thatbrings to our everyday life ugliness, filth, dishonor, humiliation of our nature and dignity.

    If you think about it, the implementation of such a program will be the fulfillment of the everlasting dream of all mankind, a truly moral revolution. First of all, it must take place in the heart of man, everyone will have to overcome himself. But we must admit that even in the oldest books it was said: that man is the strongest who will overcome his weaknesses. And there is no more terrible beast for the "king of nature" than his own bad habits. In all likelihood, the true heroes of our time will be brave men who have grasped this monster, that poisons our life, the sun is stuck.

    What can I suggest as a homework after a conversation on such a difficult topic? Again resort to the magic mirror of introspection, in which, first of all, to discern( remember) those cases when it was possible to overpower, overcome its rudeness, insolence, show understanding of another's nature, assert the dignity of one's sex or not humiliate another. Take for yourself these examples for the initial position for the subsequent behavior, and with the elders, and with the younger ones, and with friends, and with your loved ones.