When someone has purchasing power shows that have a desire whose satisfaction is authorized by society.
It is common the existence of places where men and women, who do not know, meet to dance and organizers promote women's access allowing free entry.
My mother was not a militant feminist because she had other major concerns, but to have had an easier life would surely have organized marches, protests and demonstrations of any kind of opposition to sexism, abuse, to the disregard of the rights of women .
For these reasons I grew up listening to these promotions fierce criticism in which, she believed, applied positive discrimination unforgivable not to charge admission to the dances to women.
Now fourteen years I tried "explain" the situation deserved a contrary interpretation to it. He said that in those meetings converged dance three situations:
- Women who did not pay;
- Men who did pay, and
- The musicians of the orchestra who were paid to attend.
If we ignore the other event expenses (rent, electricity, cleaning, etc..), Men will have to pay the orchestra for it to generate music that allows them to dance with the women who went free.
How I can explain this today?
As a premise I must say that "those who want to pay to give satisfaction to his own desire." Therefore, in this meeting the unique dance which seem to strive to satisfy their own desire are men because they are the only ones who pay.
As a premise I must say "alien who satisfies a desire charge for it." Therefore, in this meeting the only dance seem to satisfy desires of others are the musicians as they are the only ones that charge.
Women are not willing or satisfied?
Note: Original in Spanish (without translation by Google): Relación de las mujeres con el deseo.
(Este es el Artículo Nº 1.939)