But what exactly was it said of woman who allowed to
expose herself publicly?
When I was a child we were not supposed to have 'eye
contact' with anybody’s underwear. Never! So, based on this rule it was conclusive
that people revealing their internal pieces of clothing, or even just part of
them, would have at least a questionable moral, a sexualised element, who would
be working the eroticism through their own image. Obviously, because this issue
was involved into a sexual tenor, a list of other adjectives were applied to
these same people.
But nowadays underwear comes with griff and it can accessorize a whole outfit and exposing it is no
more related to any sexual appeal or eroticism. Perhaps, some sensuality, when
it is good taste. It is granted that any
teenager that have grown up watching people on streets, TV, and in social
events having a use of this resource can only face it as ‘normal’ (regular)
and, I imagine, wouldn’t get much when someone commented that only a whore
would dress like that 20 or 30 years ago. References…
What we have is a miscellaneous of generations kind of
flexible about what they learn with some hints of tradition merged into their
concepts and suggestions, but on my point of view, the mathematic tendency of
this evolution is to accept the fact with the same naturalness we replace an
old collection winter coat.
Please notice that I am not ignoring the fact that
there are still ways and ways of how one may reveals its underwear and how this
action can even be subjected to an old judgement regarding sexual behaviour.
When I was going into my first adult phase I remember
it was kind of awkward to mention we liked oral sex. To be honest, that was an
authentic taboo e only with the dearest friends we would dare exchange some
details. But today, any American vespertine movie talks about it freely. In
fact, I would say that weird would be not doing it or don’t like it.
As that, there are a series of others concepts, ideas
among us, suggesting connotations forgotten in time long ago without any review
and all of us can do a less appropriated use of them. We do have a permissive tendency
to analyse events with a very short lazy mind.
Psychology is dynamic because the human behaviour also
is. We evolve but our evolution is confusing because it happens physically in
the world around us much more rapid then we can actually ‘read’ it, acknowledge
it, rationally.
For instants, the micro-waves was invented in the 60’s
last century. However, 20 years later it still could be considering a luxurious
article in a kitchen as so many others electronics. Twenty years ago things
moved slower and their evolution were compassed, but today, in times of globalization,
with the high technical level we achieved, ‘everybody’ has got ‘everything’ in
a much faster pace.
Scary enough, there is also here a parallelism to the
evolution on the variety of aims we do impose to ourselves nowadays following a
very similar tacit pattern where everything became so easy and quick on the matters of
wishing and getting things. Meanwhile, seems to me that what looked like more
stable 20 years ago, truthfully, it was just slower…
This text was born from my observation upon those unlucky
people who has put faith into some help or advise – professional or not – and ended
up even more confused. But after all, psychology is just like odontology: it is
filled with mediocre professionals.
It has been a very hard time for living, full of
commotion that causes even more confusion and increasing the subconscious need we
have for order and that can lead people to hold themselves to rules and
values not quite tuned to our reality anymore, maybe, 4 inches out of size.
Rules and values that formerly in their time and space, once, were exactly what
we people needed before they have been called by revision.
Where and how we seek for guidance is the key for
the balance or so I believe.
Have you all an evolutionary week.
Eduardo Divério
No comments:
Post a Comment