If you are into celeb watching, then you will know that 1940’s hairstyles are making a comeback. People like Gwen Stephani have now adopted a hairstyle that was a favorite with 1940s movie stars. Fashion is a funny thing because trends in clothing and in hairstyles often reflect a change in social attitudes.

It was during the 1940s, and particularly after the Second World War, that the housewife role became popularized for women. If you look at movies of that time and bill board advertisements they often represented women as ultra feminine. Women, people believed should spend their days looking after the family and keeping house and then making sure they looked their best when their husbands came home. Many women wore their hair like Veronica Lake because their husbands liked it that way. 1940’s hairstyles were very much a reflection of how men envisaged women.

Economic changes in the 1950s and ’60s meant that one wage was not always enough to support a family and so an increasing number of women went out to work after having children. In the beginning much of this work was part time but as the 1960s progressed more women worked full time.

Once women gained financial independence they started to want other independences and this was reflected in the hair styles that women adopted. Gone were the Veronica Lake look-alikes. Modern women did not have time to stand with a curling iron every day so they adopted shorter, easy to manage styles. With the rise of feminism in the late sixties and early seventies short hair styles were often so severe as to be mannish. Women were striving for equality and wanted to look the part.

Nowadays rising divorce figures and delinquent children are seen by many as the result of women’s desire for equality. From many quarters there has been a backlash against the feminist movement and a call for women to look and behave as God intended. Interestingly, there has also been a move back to loose waves and braids which are reminiscent of 1940’s hairstyles.

Death of a Sales Man by Arthur Miller is one of the prominent plays which won a Pulitzer Prize. The play depicts the life of an American Middle Class Family in pursuit of the great American Dream. Here I would like to analyze the play from various schools of literary thought.

Existentialism
The protagonist Willy Lowman can be compared to Albert Camus' Myth of the Sisyphus where the Gods torture Sisyphus by making him roll a boulder all the way uphill to find that it rolls down again. Willy Lowman is forced to do a menial job for a selling company. The tragic hero of the play is a person in pursuit of the great American dream but fails to achieve and succumbs to suicide. Looking at him from Sartre's existential point of view, we find him a bearer of existential angst. Plagued by the power of negative thinking, Billy relapses into existential solipsism. Billy's character reveals an overarching narcissism.

Marxian Perspective
Looking at the play from a Marxian perspective we find the play is littered with oppressive symptoms of a leviathan, showing the perils of a capitalist society. The proletariats are struggling workaholics. We find a society that is inhuman and dehumanizing. Society is fragmented and proceeds on bettering oneself with the forsaking of one's neighbor.

Psychoanalysis
I would like to introduce the Lacanian concept of the mirror stage. The mirror stage in psychoanalysis is a stage where the child enters the realm of language and becomes a self, a subject. The mirror stage is an arena where Billy's psyche conflicts with the aspirations and goals set by him. The mirror becomes an absurd theater of life. From a Jungian perspective, Billy Lowman is an archetype of a fool. He is living in an illusory demented world. I would also like to make a comparison of Billy Lowman with Cervantes' Don Quixote. The follies of Don Quixote at one point of time were denigrated as a fool's conquest for utopia. Don Quixote in psychoanalysis can be considered as a narcissistic hero who creates the myth of existential anarchic living. Billy Lowman is a tragic, stoic hero who becomes a king of neurotic behavior.

Feminism
Billy's wife Linda Lowman is an essence of the sacred feminine. She can be compared to a mother Goddess who tries to balance with the realities of life and who strives to cope up with Billy's dementia. She is an archetype of a classic American middleclass woman who tries to cope up with the realities of life.

Postmodernism and Post structuralism
Postmodern perspectives analyze how binary divide is created in language. Certain structures are privileged signifiers and others are marginalized. In Death of a Salesman we find capitalism and the bourgeoisie to be privileged signifiers where as Billy Lowman and the proletariats are marginalized. Capitalism and the bourgeoisie become structures that can be read as texts of interpretative deconstruction.

Consequences of Sin is being called an “Edwardian Mystery”. It introduces a Ursula Marlow to the reader. An Edwardian Mystery seems to be a novel set in England in the late 1800’s or early 1900’s and tells us quite a bit about what it was like to be a feminist at the beginning of the movement.

Ursula is a great heroine-she speaks her mind, usually without offending too much, even to her father-unheard of during this particular time in history. She has friends of questionable background (men, lesbians, other feminists who get themselves arrested) and doesn’t care. This is one lady who will put herself in harms way to help a friend in need.

Marlow is very atypical, she’s a heiress and an Oxford graduate. Consequences of Sin takes Ursula out of her more than charmed life when a fellow suffragette and friend wakes up next to the dead body of her girlfriend. She is not only accused of the murder, but arrested for it as well. Ursula noses around to find out all she can about the mystery to clear her friend. The further she gets into the investigation the more she realizes that her own father has a connection not only to the murder victim but several other murders as well.

Then her own father is murdered. To find out why and where it will all end and if she’s the next person on the “list” to die, Ursula follows the trail of leads on a shadowy expedition to Venezuela, where most of the story seems to have begun over 20 years before.

This isn’t my usual “cup of tea” in mysteries, but I found myself enjoying Ursula, her personality, how she could handle herself no matter what the situation and all the very interesting historical information.

The plot is action-packed, so the reading goes very quickly and it is written so well that you really don’t realize how much information you are taking in. Ursula is a very realistic character. What will be interesting to see, since this is the first of what is to be a series of Ursula Marlow Edwardian Mysteries, is how this feminist heroine grows and changes from novel to novel.

Will she continue to get involved in the murders of other feminists? Will she keep her rather questionable-for-the-times friends? Will the budding romance with Lord Oliver Wrotham lead to marriage?

I for one am very interested to find out.

A popular local colorist during her lifetime, Chopin is now recognized as an important figure in nineteenth-century American fiction and as a major figure in feminist literature. Born on February 8, 1851, in St. Louis, Missouri, she was the daughter of Thomas O’Flaherty, a prominent businessman, and Eliza Faris. Her best known work, The Awakening (1899), depicts a woman’s search for sexual freedom in the repressive society of the American South during the Victorian era.

Throughout her literary career, Kate Chopin, much like her fictional heroines, explored dangerous new ground. She created female characters that test the boundaries of acceptable behavior for women and explore the psychological and societal ramifications of their actions and desires. They are forced to make existential choices based on the few avenues available for them to create and maintain autonomous identities outside of wife and mother in the late nineteenth-century American South. Chopin’s protagonists attempt to physically or spiritually transcend these limitations but often meet with crushing results. Chopin does not guarantee her characters an admirable place within their society, but she portrays them with dignity and sympathy.

Kate Chopin began her writing career strikingly with the creation of a triumphant woman artist-Paula von Stolz-a character who seems to be a projection of the author’s own ambitions. “Wiser than a God,” Chopin’s first story accepted for publication, portrays the resolution of the woman artist with utter confidence. The central conflict of the story involves the dilemma Paula faces when, after the death of her mother, she receives a marriage proposal from George Brainard, a wealthy, attractive man and must choose between a comfortable, conventional marriage and the career as a concert pianist for which she has spent her entire life preparing.

This article aims to study the important feminist notions and concepts such as “marriage”, “Identity” and “Woman Figure” in the story of “Wiser than a God” based on feminist theories from Simone de Beauvoir’s The Second Sex.

a. Marriage

Chopin introduces the institution of marriage as a choice rather than an absolute issue in a young woman’s life in an early short story, “Wiser than a God.” The story is prefaced with the ominous Latin proverb “To love and be wise is scarcely granted even to a god” (241). It is clear that in this story, love and wisdom will be mutually exclusive entities and one must choose between the two. Mary E. Papke suggests that in the story, “Chopin draws the mind/body split [….]” (38). The story centers on Paula, a beautiful young woman and extremely gifted pianist. She manages to shun romantic love in order to focus on her dream of a musical career until she meets George. George is very much in love with her and desperately wants to marry her. For the first time in her life she is conflicted about her future.

Paula begins to succumb to George’s affection: “She felt such a comfort in his strong protective nearness” (246). She refuses, however, to marry George, claiming that marriage “doesn’t enter into the purpose of my life” (249) -a shocking revelation. George does not understand Paula’s ambition and passion for her music and the role that it plays in her life. According to Martha J. Cutter, “Perhaps in the end language is simply not important-she succeeds without it. But Paula continually finds her attempts to explain her needs are not heard at all; even her mother tells her not to ‘chatter’ (243). Paula attempts to explain to him how important it is to her and asks him, “Can’t you feel that with me, it courses with the blood through my veins? That it’s something dearer than life, than riches, even than love?”(249). George is taken aback by her fervent declaration and answers, “Paula, listen to me; don’t speak like a mad woman” (249). It is clear that George represents societal views on marriage, and that Paula’s depiction, is based on her sharp realization that she will lose herself if she becomes George’s wife.

Although she does not marry George, Paula’s assertion that, had she married him, she would have been expected to give up her music, is proven correct with the woman he eventually does wed. Although his new wife had been an avid dancer, she “abandoned Virginia break-downs as incompatible with the serious offices of wifehood and matrimony” (250). As much as this woman was expected to give up her love of dancing, Paula would have been expected to give up her music. Here, the author points out the irony of marriage. Instead of the role of wife conveying merely social and familial woman marries, will be the defining and only identity she will have ever again. According to Papke, “Paula [….] chooses to follow the purpose of her life though she be deemed a ‘mad woman’ by George and his type, to position herself in a state of insanity. By the conclusion, it is clear that the author believes Paula to be wiser than a god” (39). Paula, however, does sacrifice deeply. She lives solely by her intellectual, rational side, effectively ignoring the desires of her heart and body.

b. Identity

“Wiser than a God,” Chopin’s first story accepted for publication, portrays the resolution of the woman artist with utter confidence (Toth 2). The initial part of the story brings up some general facts and information about Paula’s character as an artist who adores music.

These clues from the very beginning demonstrate the fact that music is merged with Paula’s character and has granted an identity to her. It’s obvious that by music she could display herself, and she could catch the attention of people around – whether in a party, in a society or in a town. These magnificent abilities could support Paula and distinguish her from the girls who lack this talent.

It is worth noticing that from the very first lines of the story, Chopin has also introduced music as a character along with Paula. Music is the soul that lives within Paula’s body. In this way Chopin illustrates both music and Paula as central and significant matters in the tale.

The central conflict of the story involves the dilemma Paula faces when, after the death of her mother, she receives a marriage proposal from George Brainard, a wealthy, attractive man and must choose between a comfortable, conventional marriage and the career as a concert pianist for which she has spent her entire life preparing. Here Gorge’s occurrence makes Paula to think of amity, affection and relation with an opposite sex. Therefore Paula at some moments after becoming familiar with George describes him as a handsome gentleman and compares him to other males that she is in relation; and approves that George is superior to them in look and appearance “He was so unlike any man of her acquaintance…she could at the moment think of no positive point of objection against him”(246). This womanly sensation that inevitably exists in Females’ nature does not make Paula to yield. Paula doesn’t want to sacrifice and annihilate her liberty and her identity that she achieved by hard practice in music. After her Mother’s death she becomes more devoted to music which is the symbol of her true self and her autonomous identity. She prefers the dreamy world, which belongs to art and music, than the real and patriarchal world, which belongs to George and his society. She believes living in moments without music is equal to extinction, annihilation and “deterioration” (248). But George expects that Paula will be willing to give up her musical calling for “the labor of loving” instead (248). He proposes to her, never fully comprehending her devotion to her art or realizing that it could conflict with her devotion to a man. Paula, who admires George, is thrilled at his request but realizes that they must part. She doesn’t allow George to separate her from her autonomous identity; even when she comprehends that George is tempting her, she shushes him up and tells “don’t tempt me further” (249). That’s why when George wants her to answer whether she is marring him or not, she couldn’t answer him confidently and she asks George to give a one week interval to her to think. George believes that he is the ‘Subject’ and the ‘Absolute’; for him Paula is the ‘Other’ not the ‘Self’ who could have an independent identity that could decide either to get married or to stay single. He couldn’t understand Paula because her character is imperceptible and unclear for him and for his society. When Paula says that marriage has no place and no position in her life, he never understands; because the society that George belongs to is occupied with girls and women who yearn for people like George to propose or marry them; so he says “Paula listen to me; and don’t speak like a mad women”(249).

George suddenly and unexpectedly sees someone different from the girl he had known as Paula begins to talk about the purpose of her life with her “father’s emotional nature aroused in her” (249). Paula makes a passionate defense of her art, something she knows she cannot understand:

What do you know of my life,’ she exclaimed passionately. ‘What can you guess of it? Is music anything more to you than the pleasing distraction of any idle moment? Can’t you feel that with me, it courses with the blood through my veins? That it’s something dearer than life, than riches, even than love?(249)

George’s reply to this-“don’t speak like a mad woman”-betrays his incomprehension and his belief that a woman who gives herself so passionately to artistic pursuit, particularly at-the expense of a potential husband, must be insane. Until now he has known Paula only as the “daughter of the undemonstrative American woman” (249).

Paula’s abilities increase in the absence of a male muse; and her loneliness and seclusion is often itself perceived as a final revolt against the society that has refused to provide her an acceptable space within which to pursue her creative inclinations. Paula’s struggle to attain her full potential as an individual is thus best perceived as deeply related to her efforts to develop her creative abilities, to grow her art, and to discover an affirming place within her world.

In this early story, Kate Chopin explores art as a kind of divine bondage, as suggested in the epigraph, “To love and be wise is scarcely granted even to a God.” Paula does love and feels physically attracted to George but is wise in her decision not to marry him. She is an exceptional woman and has the wisdom to recognize that “the purpose of her life” would be destroyed by marrying him (249). The story, rather than focusing on Paula’s moment of public triumph, shows Paula beset with temptation in her most vulnerable moment. By choosing to become a concert pianist instead of George’s wife, Paula satisfies both her own ambitions and her parents’ and thus keeps a meaningful connection to them even in their death. Seyersted notes that “Wiser Than a God” has certain affinities with de Stael’s Corinne in George’s momentary belief that he can accept a wife who does not live solely for him and his family but that it also shows a pronounced difference in Chopin’s heroine’s ability to resist romantic temptation: “unlike the French heroine… Paula tells her suitor that life is less important to her than the unhampered exertion of what she considers her authentic calling and her true self”(105).

Paula knows herself, and thus is able to avoid the trap that marriage to George would have become for her. Self-knowledge, Chopin implies, is the most important attribute of the woman artist. By listening to her own heart and instincts, Paula turns away an inappropriate mate and gains the possibility of union with a man who is talented in his own right and who is willing to let her pursue her career to its fullest. At the end of the story, Paula is resting “after an extended and remunerative concert tour,” and Max Kunstler, her former harmony teacher, is still following her “with the ever persistent will-the dogged patience that so often wins in the end” (250).

“Wiser than a God” was a triumphant beginning to Chopin’s publishing career. Never again did Chopin present the resolution and success of the woman artist so confidently and without compromise. Paula achieves fame, wealth and love. Paula seems a kind of fantasy for Chopin, an empowering wish-fulfillment, a visualization of what the woman with artistic ambitions might accomplish. This story shows the resolution of the woman artist as Chopin wishes it to be, and it implies that a woman might achieve success and fame without having to give up everything else.

“Wiser than a God” is an example of what Julia Kristeva identifies as “an imaginary story through which she [the woman writer] constitutes an identity” (166). Chopin allows none of her other women artist characters such success, however. This indicates the realization of the autonomous female artist by indicating Paula’s increased awareness of self even within the current restrictions of her society. A woman who wishes to become an artist as well as a self-reliant individual faces a double challenge in the historical context of the story. Paula establishes the possibility that the future female artist will be able to assume a respected place within her society and to maintain productive relationships that support aesthetic creativity.

c. Woman Figure

“Wiser Than a God” contains Chopin’s most outspoken demonstration of the self-sufficient woman. It is the only story she provided with a motto and her one example of what can be considered quite overt feminism, and the picture of the girl who becomes a famous pianist suffers from the strong emphasis. (Per Seyersted 117)

The acceptable role that a patriarchal society defined for a woman is that, a woman is the mistress of the house and she has to obey her husband, and take care of the house and her children. She is only allowed to interfere with the house chores, kitchen and cuisine; as Michael Warton in his article notes that: “Culturally, women are associated with the home, defining it but, crucially not owning it” (106).

In spite of Charles insistence to marry Paula, Paula prefers her solitude and wishes to be at the service of herself rather than others. She never accepts to shoulder the responsibilities of housekeeping and motherhood. She is an emancipated woman who doesn’t care for society’s expectations and regulations. Paula largely answers to Simone de Beauvoir’s definition of the emancipated woman that is, a female who “wants to be active, a taker, and refuses the passivity man means to impose on her”; who insists on the active transcendence of a subject, the pour soi, rather than the passive immanence of an object, the en soi; and who attempts to achieve an existentialist authenticity through making a conscious choice, giving her own laws, realizing her essence, and making herself her own destiny (Seyersted 104).

Ultimately, Paula reaches her goal, that is musical profession; and in her progress she achieves fame, popularity, and independence; the factors that a feminine woman lacks (Simone de Beauvoir’s definition for a feminine woman is: the woman who lets the men decide her destiny). The pride indicated in Paula’s family name does not manifest itself in a haughty attitude toward her admirer; she is soft-spoken compared to the impetuous, youthful George who insists that she is throwing him into “a gulf… of everlasting misery.” But she speaks up when she realizes they are in two different worlds, that he represents the patriarchal view of woman, and she the view of Margaret Fuller that women so inclined should be allowed to leave aside motherhood and domesticity and instead use their wings to soar toward the transcendence of a non biological career. […]George for a moment believes he can accept a wife who lives not solely for him and his children; […], Paula tells her suitor that life is less important to her than the unhampered exertion of what she considers her authentic calling and her true self.( Seyersted 103-5)

In the story we could witness the presence of feminine Victorian woman, like Paula’s mother, who is a widow and a devoted wife. She has bestowed her life for training her child and she never remarried even after years of her husband’s death. George’s wife is the other sample of typical Victorian woman who is ironically mentioned in the last lines of the story; that she was a professional dancer but she “abandoned Virginia break-downs as incompatible with the serious offices of wifehood and matrimony” (250). So Paula, the only emancipated woman in the story, never agrees to play the role of her mother in future and she never accepts to play the role of a submissive wife for George.

In reality though the real reason why she does not respect you is because of this!

You have nothing to offer as far as getting your life together.

Yes getting yourself together for yourself so that they will notice you, crave your attention, be around you. When you got yourself together you feel better, look better and command respect.

Women like to talk smack and make you feel bad about your manliness but do not fall for this nonsense because they do want a man who acts like a man, does things like men and can handle himself in any situation without falling to their knees and giving up!

By nature women need to be with men and men need to be with women.

Women also want a man who has resources, which is why Rich Men always do better with the women than Poor Men. There is no turning this around as this is how Nature works. The one with the most resources gets to breed while the one who has no resources is left watching on the sidelines.

Do me the favor and stop rolling over like dogs in submission and have some dignity! You are a man so do not be ashamed to act like it.

Build your life first before you try running around chasing skirts all day.

Still it is extremely difficult to command respect from Modern Women today since the majority of their minds are so entrenched with Feminism that they are more confused now than they were back then.

No matter how young or old or the way you look. Your confidence and ambition will show women that you are the man they want to be with. You do not have to wear a funny hat and act like a dummy. All you need to do is be yourself and have confidence.

That is why women always dig the Alpha in the room! A cool and confident man who commands respect always makes them excited! The only way to gain respect is by taking the time to make your life better. Women can sense a man that has his life together. No woman wants a man that is weak and not confident in himself.

With so much Technology and Personal Development at your fingertips learning and gaining respect is ignored. So if you do not have anything in your life that makes you command respect then why should she respect you?

If you are overweight, sloppy and weak minded then why should she respect you?

If you do not have a job or are not progressing then why should she respect you?

If you have no motivation or ambition then why should she respect you?

Talking game is like going on a job interview. You have to convince her that you are the man she needs in her life. But if you have not anything I have talked about above then your chances of getting with her will be slim to none!

So instead of beating yourself up and wondering why should she respect you. You will only have to look within yourself to see and find the answer!

What do you think? Please comment below:

I may not be a rapist, but I almost crossed the line once. I slept with my first girlfriend without discussing the matter of consent. This episode in my life has left a bittersweet memory.

You may ask if this re-imagining sexuality and consent has anything to do with my advancing age or the rise of Black feminism, the answer is no. All I am yearning for is to clear my conscience, and start afresh as a new man. The burden of the past is too much to bear.

I take ownership of this sad chapter in my life. This is despite the fact that the act itself was not rape per se. One grew up in a community that perpetuated misogynistic behaviours, and patriarchal upbringing was a norm. I guess it is also neither here nor there that I was too immature to form criminal intent. Equally, it is pedantic detail that we continued dating with the same girl long after the sad episode.

In my adult (mature) view, if someone at any point shows an act of aggression albeit covertly towards her girlfriend or anybody, it is par for the course that the resultant sexual encounter may not necessary be consensual in a legal sense of the word. I know some clever blacks would ask, did she say no at any stage? The rhetorical question would be did I ever request her consent at any stage? Of course, the elephant in the room is that I never did. Was I naïve? Perhaps. But, in all honesty, all I recall is that at the back of our young minds, we were hell-bent on getting laid that night by hook or by crook. Thanks God, it wasn’t by crook. There was indeed implied consent evidenced by reciprocal show of affection.

This is how the story went. According my now torn exercise book (diary) that records major events in my life between 1989 and 1993 my first girlfriend was Nokwazi*. My diary entry records the event thus: “1991 July 15, ‘coronation’ day by Nokwazi*”. The word coronation in its proper English sense means a ceremony when a new King (or Queen, let’s not be sexist) is officially installed. A coronation is usually quite glitzy and full of pomp. However; in my ‘hood those days if you had a new girlfriend, colloquial speaking you will say – “ingi-crownile leya cherry izolo” literally translated that girl crowned me yesterday hence all diary entries of all new girlfriends simply records the event as “coronation day.”

Nokwazi* was not my dream girl. She was slim, dark and short. She did not exude confidence or class. She was just a normal rural pumpkin. I just so happened to have had the guts to say the magic words – “I love you” and being naïve as she was she just agreed. I must say this event of my first girlfriend was indeed celebrated.

Nokwazi* was from a neighbouring village known as Gawozi. With newly found love, a new habit of writing love letters begun. I must have written five letters a week to Nokwazi* over two years that our loveless relationship lasted. Although, we wrote to each other almost daily for five days a week, our actual face-to-face visits were a rarity.

At some point in 1991, we received intelligence from our mutual friend (a woman) that Nokwazi* and my brother’s girlfriend had been granted a night out pass to attend a local function in their neighbourhood. Our mutual friend suggested we come and attend the function and this presented a perfect chance for us to get laid.

We got so excited, and meticulous military-type planning began immediately. On the day in question, we left home at about three o’clock in the afternoon – armed with heavy jackets, and concealed okapi knives. The grand idea was that if the girls refused to accompany us home – we were to scare them. We had no intention of using force. Our journey lasted an hour on foot.

Sadly, Nokwazi* and her friend didn’t know at all – that we were coming or that their virginities were at stake. We took our position on the hill overlooking Nokwazi*’s homestead so that we could monitor all her movements. We monitored her movements until sunset. At this point, we needed better intelligence that did not rely on daylight. So we contacted our mutual friend. She promised that the said night function would start at around 08:00 pm. There was already an agreement among the girls – our mutual friend, Nonkwazi* and my brother’s girlfriend that all of them were going to the function. So we waited. Our waiting was not in vain.

At around 10:00 p.m. our mutual friend delivered our girlfriends on a platter. Although, we were in a mean mood, we were mellowed by their presence. We simply announced that we were all going to sleep at the Mncube’s that night. The matter was non-negotiable. So, we pleaded for maximum co-operation. They were stunned.

Nonetheless, they started co-operating immediately – by walking the talk towards the Mncube’s household some eight kilometres away. We reached the Mncube household at around midnight. We had our way with the girls. Surely, in the morning we patted ourselves on the back for the job well done.

After the night of the long knives, the girls were released at the crack of dawn and only accompanied half-way to their destination. They left behind their virginities and dignity in tatters. Despite the fact that there was no resistance amongst the girls nor any force used, I am not persuaded that we didn’t take away their prized personal purity, honour and worth. In today’s constitutional democracies, it may be considered as a violation, all in the name of love. Somehow; it still feels like this was wrong on many levels. I have not been able to escape the feeling of guilt that I might have just forced myself on a poor defenceless woman. On the contrary, the evidence suggest that at the time, it was considered normal to proceed only on the basis of non-verbal communication.

Nonetheless, our love affair flourished long after this sad chapter. To Nokwazi* and all young women who suffered a similar fate, I apologise from the bottom of my heart. I now know better.

It’s the most fundamental concept in dealing with any study of Literature or any art form for that matter, the concept of multiple reading practices is basically a taxonomy of the different methods with which you can obtain meaning from a text. Your natural reaction to anything in life is generally a judgment, a natural human urge to make sense of your surroundings…similarly when applied to a reader’s reaction to literature you can utilize different established approaches to making sense of texts.

Dominant Reading:

A Dominant Reading usually provides a reading of the text reflecting a broad consensus on what a text may mean, such a reading usually places a great deal of emphasis on how the reader believes the author has positioned them to respond. The reader usually reads the text in an ‘author friendly’ manner, although I’ve always been mystified as to how the reader determines what the intended meaning of a text was, on the part of an author, nevertheless this concept of a dominant reading persists as a type of reading which supposedly involves the reader traveling along the trajectory the author has designed to produce the meaning that the author intended. It is my personal opinion, that it is simply the ‘mainstream’ interpretation of a text which gains the de facto legitimacy of ‘author approved’ by sheer weight of numbers.

Alternative Reading

An Alternative Reading produces as the name might suggest, a meaning that is different from a dominant reading but nevertheless recognizes the purpose of the author in a text and does not ‘go against the grain’ of the text. The distinction between an Alternative Reading and a Resistant Reading, would probably be that an Alternative Reading is still heavily reliant on the text while a Resistant Reading implicitly requires to a greater extent ideological or contextual baggage which the reader uses to challenge the premise of a text.

Resistant Reading

A Resistant Reading ‘goes against the grain of the text’ and usually involves the reader being less reliant on the text and usually involves a much greater contextual influence; in terms of ideology, race, class or gender.

Feminist Reading

A Feminist reading foregrounds the representations of women: by that I mean the way key female characters are characterised and the values they hold, and the way the reader is positioned to respond to them.

Judith Fetterly author of ‘The Resisting Reader’ a seminal work in the area of Feminist and other recent developments in alternative readings, summarized the purpose of a feminist reading as “Feminist criticism is a political act whose aim is not simply to interpret the world but to change it by changing the consciousness of those who read and their relation to what they read.”

The underlying assumption of any Feminist Reading is an awareness or ‘consciousness’ on the part of the reader of a patriarchal hegemony reinforcing an oppressive set of roles and expectations for women, and literature as part of a dominant discourse for much of human history which has supported this oppression. Thus the reader usually identifies, in a feminist reading, whether the text is part of this cultural construct of oppressive gender roles or is seeking to subvert this patriarchal discourse.

The Danger in Feminist Readings

The danger in constructing a feminist reading is not accounting for the political distinctions and movement of feminism as an ideology. First off, feminism is hardly an ideology, you can’t construct a ‘feminist’ reading because no one knows what ‘feminism’ really means. This is because of the distinct political backgrounds and social agenda that ‘First Wave Feminism’, ‘Second Wave Feminism’ and ‘Third Wave Feminism’ entail.

Secondly feminist readings can not and should not be confined to superficial readings of a character’s values or rather how a character’s values is constructed by a text, and whether this constitutes ‘a liberal’ or ‘parochial’ attitude towards the role of women.

Feminist criticism is closely associated with Freudian psycho analysis, this can be seen in the feminist study of Frankenstein by Anne K Mellor which focused on the psycho-sexual developments in the text, the phallocentric discourse and motifs. This study found great and complex meaning in the positioning of images in the text and their sexual connotations, clearly feminist readings must account for more than characterization and plot. In fact a feminist reading, must, analyse the subconscious of the text in the way images are constructed, positioned and the order in which they occur; thereby providing a more definitive and profound implication for the politics of feminism.

It is politics that feminist theory centres around, not party politics, but the broader study of the exercise of power. This means a text can not be isolated from its political period, and the reading itself must find a political implication about the system that enforces a particular gender relationship.

Post-Colonial Reading

This reading practice focuses on representations of race particularly the relationship between colonisers and the colonised, Post-Colonial literature is a broad body of work often with the shared theme of ‘writing from the margins’ or providing a voice for the voiceless. Often Post Colonial readings will focus on impact of colonisation and colonial or imperial ideologies that underpin colonisation. Post Colonial readings may identify in texts constructs of ‘the other’, perhaps symbolised by a marginalised character or setting.

Post Colonial readings are linked very strongly with Marxist theory, best seen in the recurring use in post colonial discourse of the term ‘subaltern’ pioneered by Italian Marxist Antonio Gramsci. The term was adopted by the pioneer of the ‘subaltern studies group’ Ranajit Guha, a prominent Post Colonial scholar of Indian origin. This term encapsulates the current concerns of Post Colonial scholars, Ranajit Guha and his school have examined the way Post Colonial power structures such as the Indian State after the British granted independence in 1947, still relies on the same ideas and political space, as the British Raj. This has led to the central concern of Post Colonial scholars with history, as the story of the victors, and their political intent to amend history this time accounting for the voices of the oppressed and marginalised. So Post Colonial readings share a Marxist concern with oppression and the voice of the marginalised.

However Post Colonial readings are more concerned with language as a means of reinforcing and perpetrating the colonial ideology and intent. Rushdie suggests the Post Colonial author seeks to ‘conquer’ the language that oppressed their people.

Problems facing a post colonial reading is best explored in Gayatri Spivak Charkravorty’s landmark essay ‘Can the Subaltern Speak’ where she explores the role of the Post Colonial reader and his or her authority to articulate the voice of the subaltern. She concludes, the subaltern can not be translated by anyone other than the subaltern, therefore post colonial readings are limited in unearthing real representations of the ‘subaltern’ or other.

Marxist Reading

Marxist Readings emphasize this connection between ‘Base’ and ‘Superstructure; Base refers to the economic system of a society which Marx suggested was best reflected in the relations between employers and labour and superstructure which refers to social institutions and literature in particular. Thus Marxist theory identifies Literature as part of this societal superstructure; suggesting literature is influenced by, and in turn influences the economic ‘base’ of a society. This is the crux of a Marxist Reading identifying the influence of economic and political system on a text and vice versa.

This is achieved through focusing in on representations of the working class or proletariat, and representations of the bourgeoisie or middle class/employers and the interaction between them in a text. Another important aspect is class consciousness, to what degree does a text promote awareness of class? To what extent does identity depend on class? And to what degree does the text suggest justice or injustice within a particular economic system? Does the text promote change to these relationships and constructs (revolution)? i.e revolution consciousness

Psycho-Analytic Reading

A highly complex reading strategy, which I confess, I have only a very elementary understanding of…The bare mention of Freud and Lacan is enough to confuse me… I suppose Freud’s reading of the Greek myth Oedipus is probably a demonstration of the cross purposes of Psycho-Analytic Readings and Psycho-analysis, where Freud’s reading of Oedipus influences his Oedipal theory on the development of the child etc…Thus to psychoanalysts their reading practice was not only a means of literary interpretation but a means of postulating their theories

Psycho-Analytic Readings focus on symbolism in particular within a text and usually analyses the author or a particular character to some depth. The basic fundamentals of this reading practice is this idea of the text as a dream, and the purpose of this reading practice to elicit the real meaning from this dream by following an analytical process placing importance on symbols, language and characterization.

Personal Reading

Probably the most entertaining approach is to have a crack at your own interpretation of a text perhaps synthesizing some of the approaches above, but this method usually places the greatest emphasis on personal context, on the way the reader relates to a text and is influenced by his or her own context in the way he or she responds.

Contextual/New Historicist Reading

The emphasis is on placing a text in its historical context and its place in a broader literary movement, as well as the author’s own context; this approach reinforces the influence a society has on an author, and the importance of understanding the context of reception of a text, as a tool to making meaning. This reading practice focuses on the biases of the author, suggesting the importance of understanding an author’s psychology and influences. Another important aspect is recognising the critic’s bias, and stating the readers’ own context and how it influences their reading.

This practice is concerned not only with the text but more with the surroundings both of the authorship and reception of the text.

New Criticism

If you have a ‘close reading’ section in your English literature examination, or a section where you have to critically analyse an unseen text…You have the new critics to blame!

Reacting against the practices of New Historicism which emphasized the text’s linguistic, historical, political and social context and place instead of the actual text itself. In academic circles of the time it was considered the role of commercial critics to do textual analysis, and the role of the academics was to place the text within the literary canon in terms of politics. New Criticism rejected this emphasis with things outside the text.

New Criticism was profound in terms of reinvigorating the way we look at a text. In 1954 Beardsley and Wimsatt’s essay ‘The Intentional Fallacy’ suggested that it was wrong for readers to understand a text in terms of an authors political or social context or purported intent. Intentional fallacy saw the end of readings that tried to ‘fit’ texts into what we knew about the author for example often readings of George Bernard Shaw’s works succumb to poor analysis of an individual text and instead go for the easier ‘socialist’ reading clasping firmly Shaw’s affiliation with the Fabian society. To a new critic, this was unacceptable, a text should be analysed on its own, it had ‘autonomy of meaning’.

Other new concepts they pioneered included, heresy of paraphrase, the idea you could not arbitrarily ‘quote’ from a text, as the quote only has a meaning as an organic part of the whole text, it has no significance outside that frame. Another of their concepts was ‘affective fallacy’, in other words confusing what a text makes you ‘feel’ with what it means. They were concerned with paradox, irony and complexity in a text that could be reconciled into one superior, coherent reading. They believed in light of this poetry was the most beautiful and worthy form of literature.

The origins of Canadian culture and identity are tangled and knotted, but if you dig deeply, some surprising roots are revealed.

Revisionist authors as widely divergent as McGill’s Bruce Trigger (Children of Aataenisic), feminist Paula Gunn Allen (Who Is Your Mother? The Red Roots of White Feminism), and popular writers like Ronald Wright (Stolen Continents), are revealing the extent to which the genesis of our culture is grounded in native society.

We have always been led to believe that the richness of our culture is a product of the glory and achievement of Western civilization. It is humbling to realize that it is not as simple as that.

Our social safety net, our ability and reputation as mediators, conciliators and peacekeepers, and our democratic freedoms enshrined in our federal system of government are three of the many conceptions of our cultural identity that intertwine and overlap to create a whole greater than the sum of the parts.

While these are considered sophisticated products of a European heritage, it is instructive to consider that they may also be deeply rooted in native societies.

The Hurons, for example, like other Iroquoian tribes, looked after their own from the cradle to the grave in a manner that smacks of our Canadian safety net.

When Etienne Brule wintered with the Hurons on the shores of Georgian Bay in 1610, Champlain guaranteed his safety by sending a Huron chief’s son to Paris for the winter. When the young man returned and was asked what Paris was like, he explained to his disbelieving tribesmen that people in Paris begged for food on the streets. That a society allowed this to happen was incomprehensible to the Hurons.

He also described the appalling manner in which children were harnessed, spanked, and beaten publicly, and the way citizens were punished or executed in public squares in the early 1600s. To the Hurons, the Europeans were savages.

Montaigne, the French philosopher whose writings strongly influenced the struggle for liberty, justice, and equality in Europe and elsewhere, acknowledged the commentaries of other Iroquoian visitors during the colonial era, who were shocked by the gross inequities they observed between the rich and poor in Europe.

An ethnology of Iroquoian society written by Lewis Henry Morgan in 1851 was a popular treatise in Europe at the time. It outlined in some detail the workings of a matricentral society with an egalitarian distribution of goods and power, a peaceful ordering of society and the right of every member to participate in the work and benefits of the society.

Friedrich Engels reacted excitedly to this text: “This gentile constitution is wonderful! There can be no poor… All are free and equal – including women.”

Certainly Karl Marx and other socialist thinkers at the time were similarly profoundly influenced by Morgan’s ethnology. Marx’s evolving ideas of female equality and women’s liberation for example, though never achieved in practice, were fundamental to his socialist theories and can be clearly traced to the impact of his reading of Morgan’s ethnology about the role of women in Iroquois society.

How these values informed Canadian identity is evident to this day. One of our most enduring qualities is our historic ability to mediate disparate points of view. Canada’s evolution is a wonder of nation building. This immense land, with a divisive geography and a harsh climate, was united without military revolution, civil war, or a war for independence.

The skills to achieve this remarkable feat have stood us in good stead internationally. Canada has long had a reputation as a peacekeeper for the world and we perceive ourselves that way. Canada’s leadership and commitment to the United Nations, exemplified by Lester B. Pearson’s Nobel Peace Prize, and our undiminished involvement as a peacekeeping force, are evidence of our conciliatory skills honed in national building at home.

Confederation, itself, epitomizes our ability to unify a wide variety of disparate interests. We normally attribute this to the evolution of democracy and the parliamentary system, a crowning achievement of Western civilization.

But the Iroquoian Confederacy, a political organization comprised of five distinct native societies, (later six), had a profound influence on both the American and Canadian systems of government. Paula Gunn Allen reminds us that we inherited slavery and vote by male property owners from the European democracies.

At the Treaty of Lancaster in 1744, Canasatego, an Iroquois chief, spoke for the Iroquois, “We are a powerful confederacy and by your observing the same methods our forefathers have taken, you will acquire fresh strength and power.”

In the audience was a young Benjamin Franklin, later a co-author of the American constitution. He acknowledged in his writings the influence of this confederacy: “It would be a very strange thing if Six Nations of ignorant savages should be capable of forming a scheme for such a union…”

But such a union they formed. The symbol of the Iroquois Confederacy was an eagle clutching five arrows in its claw – one for each of the Iroquois nations. The symbol of American independence was an eagle clutching thirteen arrows – one for each of the thirteen colonies.

The American confederacy adopted the Iroquois system of distinct executive, legislative, and judicial branches of government and both Canada and the U.S. instituted the unique Iroquois system of three levels of government – local or municipal, state or provincial, and federal.

Through adopting this Iroquoian model Canada was able to reconcile the many conflicting and divergent regional and cultural interests and bring about and maintain a confederation that more democratically represented the Canadian people. The fusion of the federal system and the parliamentary system is a unique Canadian approach to democracy.

The roots of our identity are indeed tangled and knotted but it is reassuring to realize the extent to which the First Nations have contributed to our uniquely Canadian culture. But it is less significant to untangle all the roots to ascertain their precise origins than it is to realize they are part of an integrated whole.

There is something that puts many people off religion. It is the notion that God is male. Feminism has alerted us to the way culture tends to prioritise the male point of view. Traditional society has been organised around male authority figures resulting in injustice for women.

Translation involves interpretation

In the Old Testament, the Divine is mainly presented as male. However, in the 19th century, various women began to question the commonly accepted patriarchal interpretation of scripture. One of the foremost of these was Sarah Grimké, who voiced scepticism about the ability of men to translate and interpret passages relating to the roles of the sexes without bias.

One possible reason for God’s apparent male gender in the English translation of the Old Testament is that it was originally written in Hebrew. I understand the masculine gender in that language can be used for objects with no inherent gender, as well as objects with masculine natural gender. You can interpret the former things as you wish, male or female.

Perhaps the translators were influenced by their image of God as powerful which fits in with a male stereotype.

God as mother

Actually there are a few passages in the Bible where the Almighty is also likened to having qualities more in keeping with compassionate, longing qualities of motherhood.

“You who kill the prophets and stone those sent to you, how often I have longed to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, and you were not willing.” (Gospel of Matthew)

“Can a mother forget the baby at her breast and have no compassion on the child she has borne? Though she may forget, I will not forget you!” (Book of Isaiah)

Prayer with one’s Lord

The practice of Christian prayer suggests a focus on God as a person. One can use the word ‘you’ when addressing one’s God. However, when referring to God, the use of gender-neutral language (such as if we were to refer to the Infinite or the Divine as “it”) does not adequately reflect the person-hood of God.

Inventing gender-neutral terms and alternating masculine/feminine terms are seen as clumsy ways of communicating. I cannot bring myself to refer to God as ‘she/he’.

On the other hand for some, if not many Christians, deep down the idea of God has no gender connotation. This is because God as male is not taking literally by them but rather allegorically.

The concept of the Divine Human

According to the perspective of the eighteenth century Christian mystic Emanuel Swedenborg, God is the divine humanity of which we are imperfect human copies. By this idea of God he did not mean an individual human being and thus not a male human being. The God who transcends gender creates the true humanity in every human being, male or female. The origin of the humane spirit in both sexes who are both created in God’s image.

Consequently, in his books, which he wrote in Latin, Swedenborg avoided any indication of masculine or feminine gender in God.

However those translating his Latin into English have tended to use the term ‘he’ for God even though this brings in gender implications that are not present in the original. I wonder what you think of the four reasons they offer.

1. The English language has no established gender-neutral singular-third person pronoun.

2. The emphasis on the oneness of God contraindicates the use of plural pronouns.

3. The idea of a divinely human personal God contraindicates the use of ‘it’.

4. Christians often think of Jesus as their Lord God. So, the identification of Jesus with God would make any pronoun but ‘he’ for God rather awkward.

Regarding the last point I would argue that for some people it is easier to relate to our spiritual source personified in a visible natural form. Otherwise it would be a vague abstraction for us.

Incarnation

So if gender does not attach to the Divine Itself, how come it incarnated as Jesus, a male? One down to earth answer is if the Creator were to be born a human being in history then the baby had to be either male or female, one or the other. If God came as a female baby we could be asking the same question.

A more sophisticated idea is that there was a male incarnation because the male aspect of the divine links more directly to the thoughts in our head. This assumes that the head symbolises a masculine approach and the heart a feminine one.

The argument continues as follows. Before we can develop spiritually what is of spiritual truth first needs to illuminate our thinking mind. Children need to learn ideas about what is right and wrong. Later we try to make sense of these rules using our rational minds. If we opt to follow conscience then new feelings will surely arise within our hearts e.g. of hope, trust, and well-being.

According to this interpretation which I find convincing, God as male is only a temporary appearance. If we progress along our spiritual journey then we will more readily perceive God as the spiritual source of all that is good and true.

Conclusion

Regarding the question about whether God is male or female. Do not people, regardless of gender, have the potential to channel God’s divinity more fully in their own ways?

Long gone are the 1950’s era of romance. Boy likes girl. Boy gives girl flowers. Boy meets the parents. Girl meets his parents. They get married happily ever after. Nowadays, dating is much more complicated. Careers, finance, mixed families through divorce, social media, internet, etc.

While the dynamics of dating have changed in many ways thanks to feminism and social media, you would be surprised at how little some things haven’t changed in terms of what men and women are looking for in a partner. While it is now common for women to work outside of the home and cheating is more rampant than ever thanks to technological advances in communication, men and women are still attracted to many of the same qualities they were 60 years ago.

From personal experience and through surveying hundreds of men and women, I have discovered some very inconvenient truths about the hearts of men and women.

1. Men and women are rarely “just friends”: That’s right! When men and women spend a lot of time communicating, biology and science says that one of the parties will probably develop a secret sexual attraction. The male counterpart will usually be the culprit, as men are more sexually driven than most women. Men will be “just friends” with a woman if that’s all she truly desires, but be rest assured, a man will wait patiently for his chance to strike! While there are some exceptions, generally, men and women can’t be “just friends”. If you’re in a relationship, it is very practical to be jealous of your partner spending ample amounts of energy and time communicating with members of the opposite sex who aren’t you! We were biologically designed to mate with each other after all! While it is tempting to lash out at your partner for texting or spending time with members of the opposite sex, it is best to sit down and discuss what is appropriate and what isn’t. If you can’t come to an agreement, it may be a clear-sign that you don’t share the same values in order to build a proper relationship. Perhaps your husband loves to have lunch with his female secretary, while you think it’s an invitation for temptation, he sees it as “innocent”. But be warned, whatever you ask of your partner, you should be able to hold yourself to the same rules and standards! If your husband or boyfriend is spending large amounts of time texting or hanging out with another woman, unless it is purely for business purposes you can almost guarantee that he is sexually attracted to her. While women often keep many “guy friends” on the side to use as “emotional tampons” to vent their frustrations on or to keep around as “back-ups” in case their relationship doesn’t work out. Many surveys show that 60% of men and women have “back-up” lovers. A shocking statistic that really makes you wonder if men and women can truly be monogamous.

2. Men are more shallow in terms of appearance: While there are always exceptions to the rule, men are generally more caught up in a woman’s physical appearance than a women is with a man’s appearance. 9 times out of 10, a man will choose the supermodel woman over the plain looking career-woman any day of the week. However, as a man matures, his preferences may balance out. Instead of going for the perfect 10 with a bad attitude, he will find more satisfaction with the “7 or 8” who is more well-rounded, dependable and nurturing. Men biologically seek out women who are physically attractive as a way to carry on healthy genes in their children.

3. Women are gold-diggers, kinda?: There is a common misconception that women are only after a man’s resources and income. While it is true that women are definitely attracted to wealth and status, that isn’t to say that a woman would not date a man who is poor, so long as he is actively pursuing goals. Women are attracted to driven men who are determined to build a life for themselves and their family. This goes back to our caveman (cavewoman) instincts. A man who is building a career for himself can be seen a potential provider and protector of the family. While there are some modern career women who prefer to be the leaders of their family, once women have children, they will almost always desire to stay home with their children while the father provides. It’s a natural evolutionary cycle.

4. Do men like feminists?: If you look at any typical feminist: She has a career mindset, dyed purple hair, nose ring, loud, says fathers aren’t necessary, usually ends up in their 30s as a childless career woman or they end up dating weak men who take on a more submissive role. This is why there is a huge exodus of men who are seeking out wives who are from places like Asia, Latin America, and Eastern Europe where the women are more submissive and feminine. However, due to the rising cost of living in the west, many American men are warming up to the idea of women seeking out careers and practicing more independence to alleviate their own financial stress.

5. Sex and money are still the main motivators for marriage and divorce: People get married because they enjoy eachother’s company (sex) and/or one of the partners is a good financial provider. Conversely, these are also the same reasons why people divorce! When the sex begins to get boring, one of the partners fails to maintain their physical attractiveness, or the income-earning partner loses his/her job, the chances of divorce skyrocket! sex and finances are the two most important things in a relationship.

6 Men need to shut up and just listen!: When women come to men with their problems, men will often interrupt with suggestions on how to fix the issue, the woman will then become annoyed and stop talking all together at the surprise of the man. However, what women fail to realize is that men have “mechanical” brains. Due to our evolutionary role as “providers” and “builders”, men sometimes fail to see the emotional rationals behind a woman’s speech. Sometimes women just want to vent without receiving a “Self-help” pep-talk in return.

7. Men show their love in more basic ways: Women often dream of the man who plays guitar, writes poetry, or does grandiose romantic gestures. While men sometimes perform these acts, especially during the early stages of dating, men are a bit more practical in the ways they show love. As Steve Harvey often says, “Men show their love with the three “P’s”, – Profess. Provide. Protect”. Men will honor their women by publicly professing, “This is my woman!”, they will provide for her by earning a good income for the household, and they protect her by scaring off any would-be creeps who would try to hit on her or make advances towards her.

8. Women care more about kissing than intercourse: While women enjoy the sexual act of intercourse, many women will admit that love-making without kissing makes them feel “dirty” or “used”. For a woman, kissing is the ultimate expression of love. When a man kisses a woman without sex, it shows that he craves her soul, not just her vagina. Many women have admitted to me that they would be more angry at a cheating spouse for passionately kissing another woman than they would be if he simply had intercourse with another woman without kissing being involved, since men often compartmentalize their sexual actions in terms of love and pleasure.

9. Why do men and women cheat? With social media making it easier to stay connected with ex-lovers and pretty much anyone we meet on the street, cheating has become easier now than any other time in history. It is also easier to get caught thanks to the “screenshot” option used on our phones. While men have had mistresses since the dawn of time, it was an act that was done discreetly and was associated with shame if caught. Now, it has become also an expectation that you will not be the only person someone is sleeping with. Men tend to cheat based purely on novelty. They get bored having sex with the same partner everyday, and seek out new lands to conquer. They may be completely in love with their wives or girlfriends, but they seek out the excitement of a new body to explore. It is purely a physical thing. Women on the other hand, usually cheat when they feel emotionally neglected by their spouse. Their affairs begin with an emotional fling that later becomes physical. This is why society is harder on women who cheat because of the common held belief that women cheat with their hearts, while men cheat with their penis.

10. Love is held together by three chemicals: Serotonin and Dopamine are released anytime you see a beautiful woman, anytime you kiss you someone, anytime you have an orgasm. These chemicals activate the pleasure centers in your brain, essentially turning you into a drug-addict, craving more and more. As you continue to repeatedly kiss, have sex, and spend time with this person, another hormone slowly begins to produce. “Oxytocin”, aka ” The love chemical”. Oxytocin is responsible for the feelings of “attachment”. When you break up with your spouse, or they die, you go through a withdrawal of oxytocin, dopamine, and seratonin, which is quite painful. Without oxytocin, your mom, your father, your brother, your wife, they would mean nothing to you. Attachments would be almost impossible to form with them. Like most things in life. everything is created upon “habit”. Relationships are no different. They do not form in one day, they are created through imprinted repetition. And before you know it, you are thinking about this person everyday without realizing how it happened! Thanks to serotonin, dopamine, and oxytocin, this person who was once a stranger, is now constantly on your mind! This can be a good thing or a bad thing, depending on how the relationship unfolds. It is great for the happily married, but not so great when a break-up occurs, which can take months or even years to recover from emotionally and physically.

11. STDs are more common than you think: 70% of people over the age of 40 in the USA have some form of herpes, while many don’t even know they have it. In fact, it is so common that many doctors don’t even test for it anymore. In terms of race, African-American Americans have the highest percentages of STDs, followed by Caucausians (whites), then Latinos, and with Asians having the lowest percentages of STD rates. No matter what the race is of your partner, before engaging in sex, it is important to discuss this topic with your partner. “Are you clean?”, if the person knowingly has a disease and lies about it, that person could face legal actions. Medically time-stamped records will show when a person was diagnosed. If your partner was diagnosed with HIV in 2006, and they told you they were clean in 2007, then that person has essentially committed a criminal act against your health! If you are positive for an STD, be sure to be completely honest with your partner. They will respect you much more for it.

12. Child support: No matter what form of birth-control you use, there is also a 1% chance it could fail. A good rule of thumb is to never have sex with someone who you couldn’t imagine being the parent of your child. 60% of marriages in USA end in divorce. If you are a man, that means you will probably be paying child support, which means that half of your check will be confiscated for the next 18-20 years. How does that ramen noodle dinner taste? Being unable to pay child support payments can result in losing your drivers license and/or being sent to prison. It is no laughing matter.

13. Rape and false-allegations of rape: Before letting a potential partner come to your house, or you go to their house, be sure to spend a lot of time meeting up at public places, talking on the phone, and truly building a foundation of trust. Men are very much sexually motivated when it comes to dating. Any hint you give them in regards to having sex, they will most likely not turn it down. However, men should know the difference between consent and non-consent. If a woman says, “No! I’m not ready’, that means “Take your hands off!”. It’s that simple. Some men do not understand this. However, there are some women who engage in consensual sex with a man and then latter regret it. In order to save face, they may cry “rape”. There have been many famous cases regarding false-rape allegations that have destroyed the lives of innocent men. Having casual sex is very dangerous for both men and women for this reason among many others listed.

Relationships can be a lot of fun. Traveling together, hanging out, having companionship, enjoying sexual chemistry. However, it also requires much sacrifice and taking responsibility. Sex is an act designed by nature to create life. It is pleasurable. The pleasure behind sex encourages our species to multiply. Sex was not designed to be a toy. It is a way to create bonding between two people as a secondary benefit, and to create life as a primary benefit. Sex and relationships are no laughing matter. When they work out, they create wonderful memories full of life and joy. When they don’t work out, they can literally ruin the emotional, physical, and financial health of those involved. Love should not be shunned, but it should also not be taken lightly.

When you create a relationship, do it respectfully. When you end the relationship, also do it with respect. All human life is precious. When two parties separate, it is rarely easily or pleasurable for either party involved.

Good luck on your love journey! May God bless you all.