Some women like to go for a walk, play and dine with a man who is responsible for paying all costs: locomotion, access tickets, the value of the meal, even she who has more money to meet those expenses while he had to borrow high financial costs to pay.
She understands that the situation is unfair but something inside keeps you from paying with your money. If I had to do rather forgo the ride.
Meanwhile the man who also knows about the affluence of women and how many limitations have to endure himself to repay the loan, rather forgo the walk rather than accept that she pays.
Probably many readers to understand the situation of the characters who walk and perhaps to have lived, but simultaneously will agree that the situation is objectively unfair. As unfair as the maldistribution of wealth of global proportions and infinitely greater consequences.
Why are the characters, and those who read the story, we think it would be better to pay the male sacrifice and pay the lady who could do no bother?
If we can admit that money is a metaphor of the semen, the situation is explained as if by magic.
Well you can explain it until we could do the opposite approach, that is, if we understand that the situation is unfair but preferable, then our psyche unconsciously interprets that money equals semen.
She would not accept the company of a man unable to fecundarle children, ... Although the idea of having children not even remotely pass by his conscience.
Artículo de temática similar:
Note: Original in Spanish (without
translation by Google): El
dinero y el semen
(Este es el Artículo Nº 1.808)
●●●
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario