1964, ATENEU
ABOUT YOUTH – Strange marriages
A little statistics: 80 percent of divorces are pronounced for the dissolution of marriages that have not yet reached one year. These marriages were not founded on mutual knowledge and respect, on a unity of concerns and aspirations. An accidental acquaintance at a gathering was enough, and the marriage took place lightning-fast, not as a result of responsible reflection on the necessity of establishing a home, but as a first manifestation of “independence”.
Of course, such marriages cannot be lasting; they most often represent an adventure, and for this reason, their life is short. Several participants in the discussion, including judge VLADIMIR VERTMAN, ANETA MANEA, U.T.M. secretary at the cloth factory in Buhuşi, and university assistant LUCIAN ŞARADIC1, pointed out how necessary it is to find specific forms for preparing young people in this field. Discussions in the press, U.T.M. general assemblies, meetings with representatives of judicial bodies would be measures meant to broaden the role of public opinion, because founding a family involves responsibilities that go beyond a strictly intimate framework.
We found the idea of comrade ION CIOBANU, secretary of the regional U.T.M. Committee, regarding the organization of festive moments for marriage, to be very interesting. Young people who present themselves at the Civil Status Office must be given special attention by the workers of the respective people’s council. The Marriage House, established in the city of Bacău precisely for this purpose, however, breathes only a kind of external solemnity. The fact that several marriages are scheduled at the same time, and that the moment so significant for the two young people is reduced to a simple bureaucratic formality of signing documents, is not likely to emphasize the festive, emotional side of the moment. It is absolutely necessary that, through special concern from the communal and city people’s councils, marriages can be given a special setting, so that they become emotional memories, unique in the life of the newlyweds.
_________________
1966, FOR SOCIALISM
In support of marriage candidates
The recent measures adopted by the party and state leadership regarding the support of families with children, the stimulation of birth growth through substantial improvement of the protection of mother and child, and the consolidation of the family through the regulation of divorce have aroused a wide echo, with working people expressing their unanimous adherence to the humanistic and patriotic meaning of these measures.
Among the actions planned by the Baia Mare city people’s council in order to implement the above-mentioned measures is the organization, starting last week, of a course for marriage candidates. To give our readers some details about the content of this course, we addressed comrade Dr. VASILE MUREŞAN, head of the health and social welfare section of the Baia Mare city people’s council, who told us the following:
- The purpose of the course in question is, I believe, easy to assume: to initiate young people who are about to marry into the problems of family life, with the responsibility that this step entails both for the individual and for society, with a view to forming a lasting family, from which vigorous, well-raised and educated children will result. (…)
Conversation carried out by: GH. SUSA
_________________
1967, CHRONICLE
Stability of marriage
The socialist society creates the economic, social and spiritual conditions that allow people to realize the conjugal union from affection, from inclination, as a free integration into the social-moral content of marriage, as Karl Marx saw in 1842 the solution to this problem, in his commentary on the draft law regarding divorce.
“One who enters into a marriage,” wrote K. Marx at that time, “does not create marriage and neither does he invent it, just as a swimmer does not invent nature nor the laws of water and gravity. Therefore, marriage cannot be subject to the whim of the one who marries, but, on the contrary, his whim must submit to marriage.”
Combating, on the same occasion, those who supported the previous legislation to the discussed draft — according to which the grounds for divorce were more numerous, and the dissolution of marriage was obtained more easily — K. Marx wrote that these opponents of the project “forget the family, forget that almost every divorce means the breaking up of the respective family”.
Finally, K. Marx also said that, if marriage were not the foundation of the family, it would be as little an object of legislation as, for example, friendship.
Indeed, the family is an important social cell, whose main function is the educational one — preparing the young generations for the constructive heroism of life in socialist society — a function carried out in close contact with social organizations.
And, since the family fulfills in socialist society a function of essential importance, and marriage is the foundation of the family, the socialist state uses, as Karl Marx pointed out, the instrument of legal regulation, in order to contribute, also by ensuring the stability of marriage, to the development and consolidation of the family.
The recent decree (no. 779 of October 7, 1966) for amending certain legal provisions regarding divorce is a clear manifestation of the concern to strengthen the family, primarily to ensure the best conditions for the growth and education of young generations, which only a united family can provide.
We must point out, from the outset, that the new decree does not mean abandoning the principles that underlay the socialist regulation of the dissolution of marriage in the 1954 family code, but rather an elevation, to a higher level, of this regulation.
Indeed, if the family code consecrated, eliminating the formalistic concept of bourgeois law, a single general ground for divorce, this possibility was not conceived as an admission of divorces prompted by frivolity or lack of seriousness. In the conception of the family code, the possibility for spouses to divorce appeared as a corollary of the socialist principle of marriage stability. (…)
The practice of the last few years of the courts has shown, however, that the legal provisions were not always applied in the sense that results from their purpose.
The analysis of judicial practice in recent years, and especially from 1965, led to the finding that the courts were not fulfilling their role of trying to reconcile the spouses, often omitting the conciliation phase.
It is also evident that the rapid resolution, within very short timeframes, of divorce cases, which, moreover, was not in the spirit of the family code, could not facilitate the reconciliation of the parties, and thus could not contribute to strengthening the family. The analysis of judicial practice showed that, in 1965, 58.7 percent of divorce cases were resolved in the record time of 3 months. A certain ease was also found in the preparation of the social inquiries carried out within the divorce procedure.
The socially harmful results of these practices became evident in all their seriousness and required the amendment of the legal provisions regarding divorce, in a way in which the purpose of the regulation and the duties of the courts, in terms of strengthening marriage and family, appear as clearly expressed as possible.
Indeed, statistics have shown not only a strong increase in the total number of divorces, but also a higher frequency of divorces in the first years of marriage (45.4 percent of divorces in 1965 occurred in the first 4 years of marriage) and, especially, among young people (41.6 percent of the total marriages dissolved by divorce in 1965 were marriages in which the spouses had not exceeded the age of 29).
Of course, the frequency of divorces was an important factor, which also determined the strong and worrying decrease in the birth rate in our country.
Before analyzing what the respective decree brings new in terms of measures intended to promote the development and consolidation of the family, we will recall that similar concerns have existed before, showing that this assessment must be made with particular care, adding, alongside the interests of minor children, the need to take into account the duration of the marriage.
A second category of provisions in the new decree aims to favor, through different means, the restoration of marriage, the reconciliation of spouses, after filing for divorce and until the exhaustion of the entire judicial procedure, and even afterwards.
This is the main purpose of the amendments made to art. 39 and 41 of the family code, as well as of the amendments made to arts. 612, 613, 615, 616, 618 and 619 of the civil procedure code.
Following the natural course of the divorce process, we will note the changes made to ensure the effectiveness of the reconciliation attempt, the judgment of the case within a sufficiently long period of time, so that spouses, who acted under the impulse of frivolity or temporary misunderstandings, can reflect on the real merits of the divorce action, the enhancement of the educational character of the trial by holding it in public session, the postponement of the effects of the decision to dissolve the marriage to a date after it becomes final, and their conditioning on a new act of will from the claimant, namely the request for registration of the decision at the civil status office.
To ensure real effectiveness of the reconciliation attempt in the first phase of the process and, at the same time, to create favorable conditions for the reconciliation of the spouses throughout the divorce, the new decree adds to art. 612 of the civil procedure code a new paragraph, which obliges the claimant to personally present the divorce request, with the supporting documents, to the president of the court who, according to the new provisions of art. 613 of the civil procedure code, will not set a date for the appearance of both spouses until he has given the claimant reconciliation advice. (…)
Paragraph 2 of art. 41, which establishes the conditions for the right to maintenance after the dissolution of marriage — namely: incapacity for work occurring before or during the marriage or within one year of the dissolution of marriage, provided, in the latter case, that the incapacity is due to a circumstance related to the marriage — is completed by the new decree with the clarification that, in the regulated case, maintenance may be set up to 1/3 of the net income from the work of the spouse obliged to pay maintenance, without being able to exceed, together with the maintenance owed to children, 1/2 of this income.
The spouse who is solely at fault for the dissolution of the marriage will have the right to maintenance only for one year after the dissolution of the marriage.
The new decree also includes, as we have mentioned, some provisions intended to directly constitute a brake against filing divorce actions with too much ease. It is about the provisions that stipulate that the stamp duty for the divorce action is between 3,000 and 6,000 lei and that it will be established by the president of the court in relation to the claimant’s net monthly income. It is evident that this provision, through the patrimonial effect it is meant to exert, will determine the spouses to think carefully before starting a divorce action and will put an end to actions filed, often, out of frivolity and without serious reasons. (…)
Prof. Dr. Traian Ionașcu
______________
1967, FĂCLIA
Wild from jealousy
Magyarosi Ştefan from the village of Mera, commune Baciu, has a jealousy that is downright criminal. Repeatedly he has beaten his wife, leaving her unconscious; once he broke her arm. The last beating he gave her was in December 1966. For his savagery, the jealous husband was arrested and sent to trial. “The children were crying that daddy took mommy into the barn to kill her” (from the statement of a witness). Regarding the parents’ incidents, there is also in the file a statement from their 7-year-old child!
Magyarosi was unforgiving and merciless with his wife, beating her in the barn or in the cellar so as not to be seen and heard, even though he had no reason. The court will be, we believe, equally merciless and unforgiving with him. Not for anything else, but it has reasons.
__________________
1975, FLACĂRA IAȘULUI
Again about responsibility in the family
Several letters recently received at the editorial office refer to the relations between spouses, in the case of families actually broken up or on the verge of breaking up. Usually, mothers request the newspaper’s support in order to be able to receive the alimony set by law and the state allowance for children.
Promises to do his duty
We will start, first of all, with the letter from Georgeta Tapalagă from Iași (Ciurchi Street, no. 127 A, block Q1, ground floor). The husband, Vasile Tapalagă, disappeared for several years to avoid supporting his two children, after abandoning his family, is tried again in 1971. Decision of the Iași County Court: one year in prison and payment of a sum of 13,000 lei.
Taking advantage of the trust his wife still gave him (a “reconciliation” takes place on the occasion of the appeal to the General Prosecutor’s Office), V.T. escapes from both. Disappears again.
“Finding out that he had been employed at the consumer cooperative ‘Unirea’ in Podu-Iloaiei (vulcanization section), I submitted to the management of the unit the documents for withholding the alimony. But I have trouble, for several months not receiving the amounts set. Last time, on January 11, 1975, those entitled at the cooperative told me they had ‘forgotten’ to withhold it. I am tired of going to court, whom else should I address?”
Comrade Georgeta Tapalagă, your husband is not yet tired. We are informed that he is preparing to take you to court. We contacted the cooperative management. We were assured (Gh. Tcaciuc, salary planning officer) that, in installments, you will receive the unpaid money and that you will no longer have unpleasantness. Write to us if things turn out otherwise.
The reason: “He doesn’t respect my mother” (!?)
A different situation exists in the family of Mihai and Adriana A. from Iași. They married three years ago, she being a high school graduate, and he a mechanical locksmith at an enterprise in Iași. They have no children.
But the obligations assumed at the contracting of the marriage were also quickly forgotten here, the place of natural harmony being taken by disagreements. Living with the in-laws, repeatedly M.A. was not received at home. Even now he lives in the company dormitory.
“I do not wish to be separated from my wife — he writes to us. If the mother-in-law did not interfere in our family, I think everything would be fine.”
Nor in Adriana A.’s words do other reasons for disagreement appear besides the relations between mother-in-law and son-in-law.
“He doesn’t respect my mother” — she brings… the supreme argument.
We understand love for one’s mother, but it does not seem to us a sufficient reason for the shipwreck of the family. We hope that reason, the sense of responsibility of all parties, will prevail in the end.
Column by Gh. MINALACHE and VERON A GEORGESCU
_________________
1976, SCÎNTEIA
The overly hasty brides… and their equally hasty parents
An investigation published a few months ago in our newspaper was entitled “The overly hasty brides”. It highlighted the ease shown by some girls — of course, exceptional cases — in the face of the solemn act of marriage. The “lightning” loves were criticized, sometimes for septuagenarian gentlemen coming to our lands with the most unhonorable intentions.
In the light of undeniable facts, we were then trying to project a ray of truth on the false dream, fed by who knows what films or colorful magazines about places where — only in the imagination of the naive — milk and honey flow, each mortal having only to choose the villa with a swimming pool or the luxury yacht.
But what do the parents of young ladies with burning heels after some man “passing through” here think, a man they have not managed — because they did not have the time — to notice even the color of his eyes? What do the parents say, then?
It is a fundamental question. After all, what parent would not do everything for the happiness of his child? Especially when the time comes to choose “the path of a lifetime”. It is a moment of great joy, but also of great responsibility, when the experience and wisdom of the parents are meant to discern, to advise, to help.
A father who nonchalantly gives his blessing only because the girl… has chosen the Latin race, has in no way reflected on the happiness of the child whom, according to traditional parental rules, he is obliged to guide on a worthy and lasting life path. The one who says “I agree” only because the stranger from afar “writes beautifully” seems more to be making a stupid, unconscious joke than to be concerned with the future of his offspring.
On the “motivation” based on “the power of destiny” revealed by a… fortune teller, it makes no sense to dwell. Here are the deplorable consequences of mentalities foreign to the moral climate of our society: irresponsible choices built on the same sand from which the falsely colored myths of a world are made that places even the solemn act of marriage under the sign of “the law of money”.
Dana happens to meet an Italian tourist. She had just finished high school. They met a few more times. And she decided, like that, in the time between two dishes. “But — says the girl without batting an eye — since someone guessed for him that on this trip he would meet the woman of his life, and since I too believe in the power of destiny and say that he is my fate, I decided.” And the mother? Well, what could the mother say? If destiny itself let itself be guessed?!
— It’s your child. What do you know about the chosen one of her heart?
— From what the girl says, the father answers, I learn that he’s a technician. Well, that’s of more or less importance… As for her intention to marry, I declare myself in agreement.
— Of course, the father says firmly. The boy is part of the Latin race and, so to speak, we remain in the family…
Doina deprived herself even of those minimal, precarious pieces of information or preferences. She got hold of a foreigner’s address, sent him a letter. He replied, and here is the girl, full of hopes, waiting for her all-too-naive correspondence. Only before his departure from the country are they to see each other.
In the end, the “lover” appears. More precisely, he announces his chosen one by phone that he has arrived in Bucharest. “I have the flu,” Doina replies, expecting from him the appropriate gesture of tenderness. Prince Charming, who had traveled such a distance only and only for her, says: “O.K.” In that indifferent tone of a man who thinks he has done his duty.
— How did you meet the man you want to bind your life to?
— Through letters…
— If it’s not indiscreet: how did you decide, after all, only on the basis of letters?
— If I am accused of superficiality, it’s an error. You see, I know well the language in which the letters received by my daughter are written. And I like enormously how he expresses himself… That convinced me: his beautiful handwriting…
Maria A., another girl from Brăila, says: “A trip to a neighboring country brought me across a tourist from a third country. A bit tired, a bit autumnal… the chosen one. Knowing him just a few times, I decided: I’m getting married!”
These are, briefly, the facts. The girl’s father does not know his virtual son-in-law and yet… “I gave my consent from the first letters”.
How much love, how much mutual respect, what truly common ideals bind the future spouses? — here are the questions that neither the “hasty brides” nor their equally hasty parents can avoid. Naturally, to the extent that they consider the unique and solemn act of marriage as a step towards true happiness and fulfillment, as one of the most beautiful moments of life. As the morality of the people to whom they belong considers it.
Ilie Tănăsache
______________
1980, SCÎNTEIA
A MARRIAGE THAT SAVED NOTHING
ION CRĂCIUNICĂ
A GIRL AND THREE SUITORS FOR MARRIAGE
Have you ever spoken with someone returned from the brink of death, who tells you how greedily, how happily and gratefully they taste again their first moments of life? I have. It’s about a girl who has not yet turned 20 and who had, in a few days, three suicide attempts, the last of which was very close to succeeding.
What facts, what serious events could have led a person who had just stepped into adult life to make such a terrible and unjust decision, to give up all the years that were to come, years she had dreamed of and for which she had prepared so much?
Here are the facts:
Ana A., adoptive daughter of an elderly couple from Cluj-Napoca, mother a seamstress, father retired, energetic and strong-willed, a little romantic as any girl her age, inconvenient and a bit defiant, wanting to show off. In the last year of pedagogical high school she transfers to an evening high school and gets a job as a worker at a metallurgical handicraft cooperative.
On the evening of December 16, 1979, after a disco program at the House of Culture, she leaves accompanied by Călin Budușan, a first-year student in Geology at “Babeș Bolyai” University of Cluj-Napoca, who invites her to an acquaintance’s house to give her a book. About 15 minutes after them, two friends of the student appear: Silviu Ovidiu Man, a 12th-grade student at “Traian Vuia” Industrial High School, and Vasile Irimi, a worker at a mechanical enterprise.
Ana is brutally beaten, threatened with a razor that she will be disfigured, and raped by all three, after which she is taken home at midnight and again threatened that if she says a word she will get a knife in her back. Of course, the three were arrested that same night, and the victim needed eight days of medical care.
What do you think the families of the three “heroes” do? Get indignant? Reflect on their failure as sons, and on their own failure as parents? Accept with resignation the intervention of the responsible organs of society?
Ha! Not at all. Each family wants to “save” their son. Save him? From what?, you will ask. From responsibility. From “dishonor”, they say, dishonor being in their view the trial and conviction and not the acts committed with such savagery.
For this purpose, one by one, the families of the three present themselves at the A. family home, in the capacity of… suitors for the girl’s hand. In case of success, according to an article of law, which I will never understand, all three would have escaped the provisions of the criminal code. The girl opposes, but the families negotiate fiercely and, finally, the parents of the main perpetrator of the rape, the one who actually initiated it, Călin Budușan, win. The strong arguments are the following: the boy must continue his studies, make something of his life, to which is added the moral and social status of the parents, two people who enjoy esteem and trust, the father an economist at the Commercial Directorate of the municipality, the mother principal librarian at the Central University Library.
WHEN I WAS WAITING AT THE CIVIL REGISTRY… HE WAS TALKING ABOUT DIVORCE
Two suicide attempts by the girl are thwarted by her parents, and from the third she is saved at the last moment by the doctors of the Surgery Clinic. From this ward she is taken by Victor Budușan, the father of the future husband, who brings her into the house as a daughter-in-law, with the civil marriage to take place later.
The marriage took place on January 12, 1980.
“Following the insistence of my parents and of Călin Budușan’s parents, and hoping myself for a change in him,” writes Ana in a statement addressed to the Prosecutor’s Office.
“Moreover,” she writes in the same statement, “even when we were sitting and waiting at the civil registry just the two of us (no one accompanied us) he was talking about divorce. For a moment, I thought of saying ‘no’, but I felt sorry for his sick mother and was afraid of the reaction he might have.”
After three weeks spent in the in-laws’ house, of “almost normal” married life, as the young wife defines it, weeks in which the husband came home almost daily drunk, they moved into a rented place in town, where the husband continued his late returns, soaked in alcohol.
After a month and a half, Călin returned to his family home, and Ana, because she was no longer kept by the landlord, and from the day of the marriage was no longer received in her parents’ house, at the insistence of the Budușan family, also returned. But the husband did not exchange a single word with his wife, making of her a permanent and humiliating abstraction. Simply, she did not exist for him.
This is the marriage contracted by Călin to escape the consequences of the Criminal Code.
As you can see, Ana was and continues to remain a victim.
“I consider,” she writes in the same statement addressed to the Prosecutor’s Office, “that the current situation can no longer continue, I can no longer bear my husband’s behavior, nor the situation I find myself in, and I am determined to request the annulment of the marriage.”
In fact, this is also the conclusion of the Prosecutor’s Office. “It is found,” writes prosecutor Tudor Negrea in an information note dated April 28 of this year, “that between the victim and Călin Budușan a fictitious marriage was concluded, only so that he could escape the rigors of the law.”
These are the facts. (…)
1981, ALMANAC FEMEIA
Politeness… at home
We invite you to reflect together on an apparently paradoxical reality: the only people to whom we sometimes allow ourselves to say, even brutally, harsh, painful, perhaps even offensive things are precisely the beings closest to us: relatives, family, life partner, even if dear to us.
It seems to us that here, at home, we can free ourselves from all the conventions of politeness imposed by human coexistence, that we can show openly, without any self-control, our bad mood, sourness, and unleashed nerves.
Let us pause for a moment, however, and ask ourselves: why? Why, precisely in front of the person with whom we share everything — joy and sorrow, home, table, bed — why should we appear before them in our most disadvantageous form, with messy hair and the housecoat that should have been refreshed since last week?
When we could, with exactly ten more minutes spent in the bathroom, retouch — even with a shadow of lipstick on the lips — our appearance?
Why should he, the husband, think that if he stays at home on vacation, he has the right to suspend shaving for a whole week and move from morning till night in pajamas, then feel embarrassed, both he and she, to open the door if someone rings at their apartment?
Why should we allow ourselves, precisely in front of him, the husband, or her, the wife, to raise our voice, to grumble, to complain, to make reproaches again and again, to harass the partner with jealousy?
Nothing can more easily kill love and marital harmony than these small, irritating, daily scenes, these permanent mutual reproaches, which shatter the peace of the home and any possible calm, solid communication.
The success of a marriage depends less — I would say — on finding the ideal partner, than on succeeding in being yourself this ideal partner.
So I would allow myself to suggest to you — even if this might stir, as a first reaction, an ironic smile on your faces — what if, at least today, we tried, just as a sample, as a small exercise in behavior, to behave courteously?
Yes, yes, courteously. Use the word with confidence, even if you’ve forgotten it. To behave courteously with your wife?
To bring her a flower — even though it’s neither her birthday nor your wedding anniversary, which you might have forgotten anyway — and to greatly admire the meal she prepared, who knows when, often just after returning from work and with the worry for the little one’s homework?
To also notice with admiration the new dress she bought, even if you don’t actually see any difference from an older one, and to show, if possible, sincere interest in her concerns at work?
The trial by fire would be this: try — one hour a day, at least — to behave with your life partner as you behave with your boss, excluding, of course, that small note of servility that some may still practice…
It’s almost strange, but here it is: although the harmony of family life is so vitally necessary to human happiness, we don’t make nearly as much effort for it as we do for our professional and social success. It is precisely here that laziness takes hold of us. Precisely here our will and self-control decrease.
A pity: afterwards, we are the ones who pay, and very dearly, for these moments of weakness.
What if we tried to practice, starting today, even for just one hour a day, the sweet, beautiful family politeness: today, no reproach, no criticism — and especially, oh, especially, none made in public.
On the contrary, maintain the harmony of today with small touches, with the recognition of your partner’s merits.
Let slip a compliment and a kind word: you’ll see how useful it is when needed, believe me…
(SANDA F. DIMA)
___________
1985, ALMANACUL FAMILIEI
THE FAMILY — an institution in decline?
The family, as a primary mode of connection between a certain number of individuals, pivoting around the fundamental man–woman relationship, has known and knows, over time, interesting changes and evolutions, but it has never ceased — and probably will not cease in the future — to be the circle that unites, from the dawn of youth until late in old age, the threads of human destinies initially independent, parallel, but feeling the need to intertwine and coexist.
“The family cell ensures, in an institutionalized form, procreation, which is an essential function for the perpetuation and continuity of the generations that make up the human species. It is born from the warmth of that instinct, impulse and feeling that cause two people of opposite sex to feel attracted to each other, motivating them to seek each other, to approach, to unite, most often for life. This probably explains why, at least in certain periods, the family has been the support of social cohesion and the keeper of tradition, providing the energies necessary for the functioning of society as a whole.
Nevertheless, in contemporary societies, there are phenomena that seem to make it increasingly difficult to generate and regenerate this cell, which in turn generates social substance, foreshadowing or marking some ambiguities in the functional model of family life. It is a reaction to taboos long maintained by the old society around sexuality, excessively controlled and encapsulated in the corset of rigid, non-permissive norms; today, young people seem to be moving toward a sexuality practiced freely, omitting the cultural component of intersexual relationships. And when they agree to become marital partners, they are not yet sufficiently prepared to move from the simple association of two people of opposite sex to interpersonal synchronization and compatibility. Hence the early appearance of dysfunctions — disharmony, tension, conflicts — which, associated with a possible progressive decrease in the intensity of the sexual function’s motivation, in relation to a partner chosen initially on predominantly sexual criteria, can lead to the disintegration of marital couples. (…)
The family is not a fixed unit, but a mobile one, with a history that unfolds over time, the model of marriage, of motherhood and fatherhood, of manhood and womanhood being exposed to all sorts of trials. Are the positions of equality between man and woman, gained legally and educationally, maintained within it, given that, as some specialists observe, women are still the ones who wipe, wash and change diapers, wash dishes, do the shopping and push the vacuum cleaner through the house, while also contributing to the earning of the living through work? The actual inequality of occupational and family roles can generate discomfort and conflicts. It is evident that marriage that becomes accustomed to giving up sexuality, sexuality that refuses to couple with motherhood and fatherhood, and the multiplication of children’s parents through an increasingly early and frequent divorce mechanism are not favorable to preserving the family as a whole. (…)
____________________
1987, ALMANAC FEMEIA
“I ask for your daughter’s hand…”
On this matter, between Her and Him there was complete agreement, “the great entente” as He called it, with the superior smile of a mature man established in all things. Are we of legal age? We are, She agreed. Will we receive assignments and soon live on our own salary? He continued his rhetorical questions. (She, again agreeing, with an air half dreamy, half worried). We will. Do we live in an era in which each chooses freely and according to the will of their heart their life partner? We do, She replied, this time in a very firm voice. So: we love each other, we have tested our feelings, we get married. Done! We decide our path in life, not others. What’s this about asking your parents for you as my wife? He asked, full of (manly!) pride. They belong to a generation that is no longer enslaved by outdated, formal customs. What’s the point of going with our eyes downcast and asking the parents for consent? She also agreed. We’ll tell them after we’ve been to the Civil Registry Officer, just the two of us, like that, poetic and original,” He proposed, feeling on his lips a slight shadow in the depths of his soul that his colleagues wouldn’t hear his resolute “Yes” spoken for life. “Won’t they think we’re hiding from the world?” Her voice, softer now, and at that moment she felt a pang of regret that she wouldn’t be showered with flowers, kissed by all the relatives and friends, and the old lady next to him, who, she knew, had made eyes at Him for some time. “Alright, you tell your folks and I’ll tell mine” (He sighed with relief). But only a day before. Agreed?” She wasn’t very convinced that a single day would be enough to buy the new wedding dress. And besides, candies and sponge fingers had to be bought — who ever heard of a civil wedding without chocolate-coated biscuits? “You’d give up our pride as free and independent people for the sake of some candies?” came His voice, vibrating with the indignation of someone ready to take on the responsibility of a young and solid family, with a house of stone and all. “Nooooo,” She replied with a dignified affirmative negation, I wouldn’t give it up for anything in the world, but… (a saving lightbulb went on in her mind) I don’t have my papers with me, my mother keeps them all, I don’t even know where, so I have to ask her for them.” “Better you ask your mother for the birth certificate than for me to ask your father for your hand in marriage!”, He replied, with a good instinct for self-preservation, and suddenly felt the blood rush to his cheeks (ah, cursed reflex, blushing like a young miss, he cursed himself inwardly) and felt his spine vibrate in his voice and saw himself seated solemnly, dressed in his formal suit with tie, at the dining room table, with her mother on his right, her father on his left, with the sweetness and gravity of his thoughts before him, and, like in Caragiale, He sighed, superior and choked with shyness just at the thought, and heard himself stammering: “I-I-I a-ask for your daughter’s hand…”. She was silent. For a few moments she was silent, and He, busy universalizing his conflicts of ideas and feelings, hadn’t even noticed. She was silent, gravely and dreamily for a few long moments, then He heard her: “But my mother would prepare your favorite little horns, I’m sure. And she would start to tear up with emotion.” His blood froze in his veins: “Whaaat? You betray me? You’ve already started to betray me? How can you leave me alone in this situation, knowing how shy I am… no, no, that’s not it (he retracted manfully), but how many symbolic shivers there are in this passage of a modern young man over the remnants of formality”… She didn’t hear him. “I think even my father would shed a tear at the corner of his eye, no matter how much he tried to be strong. You know he likes you, especially since you let him beat you at chess…”
Then she shook off this moment of totally unmodern sensitivity and communicated an unshakable decision. “No, darling, you’re right, it’s not necessary. We’re not going back to the morals of grandmother’s time. You won’t ask for any hand. You won’t ask for any wife. Better than you blushing and stammering there, in front of my parents, and ‘they thinking that… that…’”
“What?!” He jumped up like a spring, seized with anger and great masculine dignity. “A child? A milksop? Well, tonight, after class, I’ll present myself to your parents. How do you say it again?”
— I ask for your daughter’s hand, She rose on her chair, suddenly feeling herself a very important feminine being.
— I told you I don’t like that formula with the hand, it’s too partial — he still had the courage to joke… I’ll say “I request to get married…”
What’s that “I request”? What, are you making an application to the Housing Directorate?
Then: I beg you to give her to me as my wife…
What would you say to the phrase “We would like to get married. Do you agree to entrust me with your daughter’s happiness?”
The in-laws
The invitation had been made two weeks ago and today the time had come! Today was the big day: today they would meet. The in-laws. The big ones with the small ones, his parents and her parents.
For two weeks, the younger mother-in-law bustled, bustled, bustled, bustled, prepared, cooked, not even the spring cleaning had been so thorough: to show the other in-law from what kind of home she was taking her daughter-in-law. Even She, the young one, “the bride”, was made to clean the windows (in her room) and to make a tray of little horns (just one) so that her mother could have a clear conscience when boasting that her daughter was a good housewife (it didn’t matter that she “finished” them herself with some jam filling and saved the little horns from burning at the last minute).
For two weeks, the elder mother-in-law couldn’t decide what to wear so that she could decide what to wear so that it would be neither too-too nor very-very, you know. And rummaging through the closet, she got to the navy blue wool skirt, with a nice collar, and her thoughts wandered, and there aren’t many like this in the world, what it would be like when his mother would find out, and she would feed him and have clean socks handy, iron his pants to wake him up in the morning (for a week) before the alarm clock, send him somehow to classes, and put in his bag what she knew he liked, and she would see her mother’s heavenly treats. Offf, sighed the elder mother-in-law. Offf, sighed the younger mother-in-law. Offf, sighed the younger mother-in-law, looking at her daughter, how beautiful, smart, and well-behaved she was, as few are in the world — this was said by her own mother. The in-laws sighed frequently from their own emotions, more touched than tearful, they sighed (it didn’t matter) over the table full to saturation, more precisely until it overflowed (the big one).
The elder mother-in-law circled the table with timid eyes and threw a last glance into the oven.
(At the next visit, it will be the reverse meeting, yes…)
In the next room, He and She were buried in studying and making plans for the future, and from time to time they made whispered, quick declarations (or whispered and quick), pulling out projects waiting to be inked, colored pencils, compasses, pens. And, in their midst, sitting cross-legged on a pillow each, they, the darlings, and a moment of intense concentration, ears pricked at what would… “What do our children say” — She broke off from her sigh, blushing with joy. Of course, why wouldn’t they laugh? — “That’s a knockout!” — He clarified — “there’s no voice louder than yours!” — “Of course” — She replied. He, no, just for a moment something clicked and he didn’t know what to think, my mother would totally reveal me to your mother, never taking her eyes off me. I wouldn’t have believed this for any pore, that it is precisely this word to perfection, that’s how it’s annulled — with it: clear. It works! Of course! — He added.
…In the dining room, where the feast was ending, the parents were talking, still about the children. “Imagine if we tell on him?” — the elder mother-in-law suddenly asked, worried. It was actually a subtle way of hiding a source of irritation that had gripped her (when the younger mother-in-law said that girls are closer to mothers and boys to fathers). — “It’s not true, it’s not,” her husband also doubted, convinced of her condition as a privileged emotional mother. — “Well, I’d prefer a granddaughter.” — replied the elder mother-in-law, slightly muted. “A boy is too catas…” — “Here!” — He appeared, full of the charm of youth, She and He, right in that room. Their appearance instantly cooled the slightly tense atmosphere that had crept between the two women, elder and younger in-law, from the sides of the couple, so to speak, pulling toward the main couple: boys, the women seemed convinced, persistently disputing:
— I want a grandson.
— I want a granddaughter.
“We’ll make you both happy,” the source of joys — the young ones — said with a laugh. “Just have a little patience until we finish the exam session…”
Do we get involved between them?… Do we not get involved?
So, the young couple will live with the parents. Him. “For the time being,” went their decision… “One” meant the repairs. “The other” — the possibility of obtaining a separate home. For the time being, then, her girl’s bedroom would hospitably host them both. He was given a small place in the wardrobe and the front door keys. She assigned him the pillow and territorial care: “Put it next to what I say there, maybe higher, maybe to the right, well… that’s why I put the wardrobe against the wall, so you wouldn’t put it on top of it. She removes the small iron rods from the bed, so the bus could climb, and quickly takes out the tip (until the varnish shows; He could, out of sheer happiness, take her hand — she appeared so delicate, mother was cooking, father approving — and only when she would get busy as a housewife alone when it’s their turn…).
And one fine morning, we don’t know how it happened, but she came out of the room somewhat upset, almost on the verge of tears (towards her mother’s house) and sipped her coffee and breakfast with appetite. He seemed confused and told a friend: “Kiss your hand, ma’am” as usual. In the evening they ate together without exchanging a word. The next day, He was late on the phone (and forgot to call out “phone!”) and she went in the afternoon (after a phone call) to visit her parents. Mother sensed — with the genetic sensitivity of a mother — that the young couple had quarreled, disaster was approaching, She would part from this Him whom she had taken out and embraced when he went to war without a sword and flowers and without joys and without great hardships, and without ages — at her ages — from the very first sight.
On his terrace the flowers would not be green. Mother looked at her with calm eyes, adjusted His pillow. “We don’t interfere,” and she wouldn’t look at him at all, although she knew what might have happened in his eyes.
“We don’t interfere, we don’t get involved” — father had decided, with manly secular wisdom, and mother would agree from time to time, thinking how much she would need now to ask her daughter for something, a tip for prayer and a hot stuffed cabbage.
But she stays an entire day in the kitchen, eating everything she finds and long ago hadn’t said what she told at confession, while He says today he won’t eat, he passed by his mother and grabbed something there in a hurry. Mother has the revelation of the genetic code: the maternal traits — as in, He was not as much Mierlița’s as it had seemed. Likewise, she has the revelation of the room and the photos — of mother, but told in secret to everyone: “It wouldn’t hurt if He, our son-in-law, would also eat here on Sundays, if he doesn’t leave all the burden on our shoulders.”
Father is simple and sullen, but cautious. They don’t hide under silence a true storm. However, mother suddenly opens the windows (but that’s not dignified for a housewife alone when it’s their turn…).
On the worktable remain unarranged, the towels with socks, the cupboard with plates and dishes has gone to the market, but She leaves to pick him up from classes and they return home, even if today husbands are equal in all things.
Anyway, the sky of the situation had covered with gray clouds. And just now, the in-laws arrive for a visit (the little nephews, unannounced!).
“We were passing by and came up to see you,” says her mother, looking at Him with a sweet smile too quickly hidden from view. He recognizes her, the room is not unfamiliar to him…
“What, the children — haven’t they come home yet?” he asks, shrugging. Father says that this way, perhaps, he can check out (only with his eyes, of course) all the dusty corners — of the rooms. “It’s surely smaller than the one she saw back home” — she smiles, the one afterwards, inwardly, more serious.
He says other things, look how they’re piled on top of each other in a corner of the bed, with His shoes, His, not his. In the evening, on the corner of the chair one sees a sweater and on another table, a key, which window matches the window.
They say: “how could he show it to someone else, if they’re also leaving him to go through the libraries, and for there to be dust on the library shelves, and it was she who put her cold feet when on that first day she went to his parental cupboard, the small whipped cream taste from the parental roll.”
And while he, the father, starts playing, leisurely, a game of chess, he, calm, sees that they’re making efforts with decorations.
(…)
Getting up from the chair and heading, with an air of grandeur, towards the kitchen, her mother throws over her shoulder, with a meaning full of tenderness:
— What can you do, that’s how today’s young people are. They rush headlong towards marriage…
— …as if they’re going to miss the last train, completes also his mother, thinking that fate had the misfortune of placing him in this strange house where he went to wash his own socks.
(…)
By Sanda Faur
______________
1990, ADEVĂRUL HARGHITEI
An Anachronism: The Bachelor Tax
I have already pointed out — on several occasions — without any effect, everything being swept under the rug, certain aspects which are, I say, particularly inhumane and, why not, I would call them by name, normative acts which have STRUCK and STILL STRIKE our salaries (of very many INNOCENT employees) and I mention, as it can be seen — with “teeth” — the teeth of those who should intervene, not now, but right after December 22, 1989 or, at the same time, with the repeal of the hateful decree banning voluntary pregnancy termination.
I referred to, and refer specifically to, the hateful normative act Law no. 1/June 30, 1977 regarding the tax on the wage fund where in Art. 22 it states that: “persons without children, married or unmarried, over the age of 25, who work in state economic units and state institutions, will pay a fixed monthly contribution, differentiated according to the basic wage rate, as follows:…” And this, I specify, was again a discrimination, for the fact that the Securitate officers, militiamen, officers in reserve and in active service WERE NOT included under this “human innovation” of Ceaușescu’s. These were exempted. As if this “human” LAW was not painful enough, the collaborators of the “most beloved son of the people” (I believe lawyers, philosophers and economists with a “human” education) promptly intervened with the decree, namely no. 409/1985 of December 26, 1985 which increased (!!?) the respective tax to almost double!
I referred to this decree and asked that it be repealed, but censorship did its work so it didn’t get where it needed to, and maybe now it will be heard through your medium, and if not, I will strive to make myself heard through the VERY RECEPTIVE BROADCASTS, truly purely HUMAN!!: “Radio Free Europe” and “Voice of America”. At least for them to hear and see how “humanism” and “democracy” are achieved in our country, especially since December 22, 1989.
I specify that: I turned 61 and while working, at scene two of the month of December 1989, namely from January 9, 1990 — for reasons of “retirement” — in the trade union style, that increase of 375 lei was not withheld from my salary! because now, on February 9, 1990, for the month of January 1990, I am to have withheld — no more and no less than 750 (seven hundred and fifty) lei! Here is the true face of “democratism”. It seems someone raised this issue and was told that “it depends on the Minister of Finance”?!
Maybe for the Minister of Finance, his salary doesn’t feel it, or he has children, or he needed it, but I see it as a matter for the current State Leadership, for those competent to adopt and repeal normative acts that directly strike at people. My wife is 52 years old, he 24 and they are still unmarried, until this Ceaușist normative act will be maintained.
I precisely remember an epigram from the time of the regime before “democracy” — that is before 1947 — quite funny, which has its place here (I won’t write it down). But, in any case, it went something like: all unmarried men over the age of 25 pay a “bachelor tax”. Not once were unmarried women personally taxed!
In conclusion, I beg from the bottom of my heart, as urgently as possible, to repeal the respective normative act which is not at all humane, but to revert with retroactive effect and to withhold from January 9, 1990 only from those who wish and to apply starting from February 1, only for those who meet the last 2 years with terminal age in the socialist units!!!
With esteem and special respect,
Gh. Petrau
________________
1990, ALMANAHUL SĂNĂTATEA
“APTITUDES” AND PSYCHOLOGICAL INAPTITUDES
Considered by some a true science, and by others a lottery, marriage highlights more than any other human relationship the way in which two personalities adapt to each other, shaping each other mutually. The intelligence, tact, and emotional capacity of two young people barely out of adolescence determines, in fact, their future, the durability of the family, the happiness or unhappiness of the couple, of one or the other spouse, their health, and the development of the children.
Are there special “aptitudes” for this?
Can we talk about “inaptitudes” for family life?
These are key questions around which our interview with psychologist Mihai Jigău, from the Outpatient Clinic of the “Dr. I. Cantacuzino” Hospital in Bucharest, revolved.
— What is the family from the point of view of your specialty?
— The family is a microsystem integrated into the social system (with which it is directly interdependent) and which presupposes a series of relatively stable and repeatable relationships between members — the couple — of a biological, social, material, and spiritual nature. The family thus represents a complex of social and moral relationships, which combine with procreation and raising children, with cohabitation in a household. Any disruption of these relationships inevitably leads to functional deficiencies of the family.
— What types of relationships are established within a family?
— First of all, there are the relationships between spouses, and then those between generations. The former are characterized by a series of legal but also moral-ethical duties, such as: solidarity, the reciprocal duty of unlimited moral and material support in any problem, love, respect, a normal and fruitful intimate life, a spontaneous — or mutually agreed — division of household chores and, obviously, an entire range of economic and material obligations. Of course, when we talk about intergenerational relationships, we refer to parent-child relationships and, later, to the relationships between grown children and their now elderly parents.
— What are the most frequent and serious functional disorders of the family?
— The end of marital life (although sometimes former spouses continue to live together); abandonment of the home (with all the legal implications of family abandonment, when there is no longer any material contribution to the family’s upkeep); extramarital relationships of one of the spouses; conflicts over material matters and the use of income; disagreements regarding the education of the children; inequitable distribution of obligations and household work and, perhaps most often, the eternal mismatch between the major personality traits of the two spouses, between their goals, conceptions, and principles of life.
— Who provides the model of the family, as a type of relationships, organization, attitudes, and principles?
— Predominantly, the families of origin of the two spouses, but to a relative extent also the social model of family promoted by the mass media, the one perceived by them in other families, leaving, of course, room for an original, inexhaustible part of organizing and conducting family life, because the two partners are unique beings, unrepeatable in their personal history and biological and psychological structure. (…)
— Often, in a newly formed family, in-laws interfere destructively. Please refer to the implications of the psychological, social, and economic independence of the members of a newly formed marital couple.
— The parental attitude, in itself, is infantilizing for the children, so with marriage there is a rapid process of psycho-social maturation, the spirit of responsibility and decision-making capacity increases, as does the potential for social relations with new groups of relatives and friends. Economic independence presupposes the development of a sense of household management, saving, and prioritizing individual and family needs.
— Can we talk about an “aptitude” for “life as a couple”?
— Certainly. This consists in the partners’ ability to shape each other, to understand and accept the other as a distinct personality structure that must be respected, to set and achieve common goals, ideals, and needs; ultimately, the aptitude for life as a couple presupposes the ability of the partners to adapt to the demands of family life, the process of adaptation sometimes involving renunciations.
— Does family life also involve the birth of a spirit of competition between spouses?
— As in any other field, interpersonal competition has a predominantly positive role, involving progress, development, and improvement. Competition between spouses — understood as an activity of continuously raising the professional, cultural, and intellectual level in general — is beneficial for both partners, as long as in its course the “loser” is not a loser, does not consider himself and is not considered as such by the other. Competition can also take negative forms when it aims at non-essential elements of family life or when it becomes an end in itself, in which case the family atmosphere inevitably becomes conflictual.
Sometimes the family goes through a crisis situation; what are the causes and how is such an eventuality resolved?
— A family crisis situation is a conjuncture, sometimes seemingly without escape, generated by a series of major events, such as: acute and repeated conflicts between partners, serious illness of one of the spouses, death of close relatives, major professional problems, serious material losses. Most of these situations (except for conflicts perceived as irreconcilable between spouses) are solvable over time (by the family members themselves, by the couple’s parents, friends, colleagues) and cannot essentially affect the family, in its characteristic as a social cell. In any case, to avoid such situations, tact, patience, and intelligence are needed, which, added to love, represent a sum of “aptitudes” for the marital happiness of the two spouses.
Ion Dumitru
_______________
1990, TINERETUL LIBER
FROM WIFE TO MOTHER
In the emotional space, at any time and in any place, there is an immortal photograph: two people — HE and SHE — in the clothes of their youth, solemn, festive, united on the great day of their wedding.
The family constitutes a fundamental phenomenon of social life, the first social relationship of human communion, within which people — men and women — arrange their lives together on the basis of marriage.
Establishing a home raises problems of the most varied kinds, determined by the biological, spiritual, general-human, and social aspects of the partners. There may be discordances, more or less annoying, that require so-called trial periods, at the center of which one must reach that spiritual and physical communion indispensable to a marriage.
A psychologist once said: “You learn to be a partner in the family just as you learn to play music. Anyone can. Only, some are content to tap the piano keys, while others play Beethoven…” For the former, things are simple. For the latter, the apprenticeship of family life begins after the honeymoon.
The destiny of the couple is deliberately forged, with the mutual support of the two partners who have united their lives. The foundations of the family’s health are laid before marriage. The preventive role of the premarital consultation is reflected in raising the educational level of young people.
Instruction regarding intimate life, in its sexual aspect, must be carried out by the doctor and by the parents. Educating young people in the functioning of the genital apparatus is part of our social duty — as parents, teachers, doctors.
Relations between the sexes have changed compared to past generations — becoming freer, more open, more real and closer. They require only rational and careful guidance, for the benefit of the young people’s health.
The “honeymoon” — with its emotions, joys and troubles that may appear — must lead to the harmonization of the relationship between the two partners, to the creation of a symbiosis, of a true couple. However, a regular sexual life requires knowledge of measures for genital and sexual hygiene, and of certain rules of conduct. A disorderly sexual life, with excesses, is tiring and harmful to health; while rare sexual contacts can cause nervousness, agitation, insomnia.
If after approximately six months of regular sexual life the partner does not show sexual desire, complains of pain during intercourse or other disorders, the gynecologist should be consulted to identify objective or subjective causes.
Any leucorrhea (vaginal discharge) must be reported to the doctor for determining the etiology and correct treatment. Neglecting, delaying, or minimizing these symptoms can have serious consequences on the woman’s future.
It is recommended that the woman go twice a year for routine check-ups and at least once every three years to undergo a complete etiological examination. Self-examination of the breasts and seeing a doctor upon the appearance of any tumor formation should not be neglected.
During menstruation, the following should be avoided: strenuous physical effort, long journeys, cold, humidity, sexual contact, and rigorous genital hygiene must be maintained.
As age advances, pregnancy and childbirth can become more difficult, as the body in the meantime suffers various illnesses or intoxications (especially due to smoking), which reduce general resistance. The entire structure of the woman is designed for motherhood. This creative role ennobles her, brings her satisfaction, and maintains her biological and spiritual balance.
Of course, current legislation guarantees the right of every woman and every couple to decide whether and when they want children. Abortions can be performed on request, in health units. However, abuses in this regard or excessive use of contraceptives can have serious consequences, such as: hemorrhages, infections, uterine perforations, menstrual disorders, ectopic pregnancies, sterility. (…)
Conf. Dr. I. Munteanu, Dr. Viorica Burada
______________
1990, TINERETUL LIBER
Will the tax for celibacy and for families without children be abolished?
As we announced in our Tuesday issue, very many letters and phone calls received at the editorial office from numerous young people request us, almost daily, to answer one question:
What will happen to Law 1/1977 and Decree 409/1985, regarding the tax for celibacy and for families that have no children?
We consider the question justified all the more since it is known: the law prohibiting the normal course of pregnancy was, rightly, repealed — this being one of the first highly popular measures taken by the Council of the National Salvation Front.
To clarify this matter, we addressed Mr. Nicolae Săndulescu, Director of the State Revenue Directorate within the Ministry of Finance.
Reporter:
Mr. Director, very many young people — in particular — but also mature persons request answers from us regarding the fate of an extremely unpopular law, reinforced by a decree which simply diminished the incomes of an important category of the population.
Nicolae Săndulescu:
Let’s first make a clarification. These taxes existed even before the issuance of Law 1/1977. Certainly, in the disguised form of the income tax, which — among other things — included such a tax. It is about Decree 1086 of December 31, 1966, which very few people knew about.
With the abolition of the income tax in 1977, the calculation of this tax in a fixed amount began, depending on monthly income. Then, it was increased excessively and unjustifiably, thus becoming a source for important cash funds.
Reporter:
Tell us, was this a personal measure of the old regime or is it also found in the legislation of other countries?
Nicolae Săndulescu:
No, the measure is applied equally in other socialist or capitalist countries in Europe, but in a much more nuanced way.
In Bulgaria, for example, these taxes are paid by women between 21 and 45 years old and men between 21 and 50 years old.
In West Germany, England, and France, where the tax on total income is quite high, it decreases depending on the number of children in the family.
It is, therefore, another way of encouraging the birth rate.
Reporter:
You spoke of important cash funds diverted. We understand that these sums collected from young unmarried people (still up to the age of 25), as well as from families who had no children, did not end up where, naturally, everyone expected: in institutions with specific duties in strengthening social assistance?
Nicolae Săndulescu:
Exactly. I want to tell you that, in the period 1977–1990, these taxes — I underline once again — were particularly high, affecting approximately 1 million people, from whom sums amounting to over 18 billion lei were collected.
Yet, social assistance in our country — everyone knows it — became more precarious day by day.
Reporter:
Given this situation, what is the Ministry of Finance undertaking to eliminate this law?
Nicolae Săndulescu:
We thought, from the very first days of the Revolution, of a series of measures that would lead to the elimination of this discriminatory state.
I must confess to you that, at present, we have drawn up a draft decree in this regard, which has received the necessary approvals, including from the Ministry of Labor, and which has been submitted to the Government.
Reporter:
Can we communicate this long-awaited news to our readers?
Nicolae Săndulescu:
Yes! I think so!
LAURENȚIU OLAN
_____________________
1991, ZIARUL MAGAZIN
If you wish for a long life, you must get married
When a matrimonial agency tells you that celibacy is harmful to health, you might smile.
But when an entire team of researchers from the University of San Francisco comes with evidence that middle-aged single men have a “chance” twice as high as married men to die within a ten-year period, then both the married and the unmarried stop to listen.
Such news naturally captures public opinion. As for the doctors, they try to find a plausible explanation for this dramatic difference between the two social categories.
Thus, a team from the aforementioned university, led by Prof. M. A. Davis, a specialist in epidemiology and biostatistics, analyzed the effect of living conditions on mortality.
Given that marriage acts somewhat like a “social buffer,” researchers expected that people living alone — women and men alike — would have the lowest chances of survival.
To their surprise, the same minimum survival rate was recorded for those living with a partner without being married!
“The critical factor, in Davis’s opinion, would be the presence of a husband or a wife.”
Even more interesting is the fact that the low survival rate was more often found in people who were widowed, divorced, or living apart, than in those who had never been married.
It should be noted that Dr. Davis’s team carefully eliminated any other possible cause of death, such as: cholesterol, smoking, or chronic diseases.
A first explanatory factor could be related to the unhealthy diet of single men — probably influenced by the “tradition” according to which women are better informed about nutritional needs than men.
Then, emotional and social factors also come into play. Analyzing these requires additional data on the differences between married and unmarried people in terms of:
nervousness and anxiety,
the incidence of suicides,
fatal accidents,
as well as the influence of emotional stress on mortality among those living alone.
Perhaps, in the end, the explanations will be complex.
Perhaps they will prove to be simpler than we expect.
Ultimately, what the results show with certainty is that marriage can ensure a certain well-being, which, in fact, is the first step toward happiness.
And what more could you wish for than a drop of happiness, to have a long life?
Mihaela Dorobanțu
__________
1993, MAGAZIN
Bachelors… by conviction?
For many people, the choice of celibacy remains unchanged for their entire life.
Moreover, psychologists say, there are more and more people who — rather than getting married — prefer to live alone or, in any case, not tied to a stable partner.
This does not mean that their life would be any less interesting.
Convinced bachelors claim that the freedom to organize their life (sentimental, but not only), without having to answer to anyone, is a precious thing, one they value and would not give up for anything in the world.
Of course, proponents of married life claim the opposite, arguing that the melancholy, sadness, and depressive states of bachelors could be balanced by a… steady soul at their side.
Moreover, psychologists state that behind the apparent cynicism of the unmarried hides a deep feeling of solitude.
Anyway, if we look carefully around us, we see that the phenomenon is visible in Romania as everywhere else in the world:
the number of bachelors is increasing.
The highest frequency is noticed among those around the age of 30.
Why do people choose celibacy?
How do demographers explain this trend?
It seems to be a “mix” of causes, such as:
- Distrust in the institution of marriage
- Increasingly high and specific demands
- Difficulties in finding the ideal partner
For some, however, solitude is not easy to bear.
One more piece of evidence? In America, bachelors wear on their lapel a small electronic device, designed to emit sound signals when the ideal partner is nearby…
______________
1995, FEMEIA MODERNĂ
BETWEEN US, WOMEN
Do we contribute to our partner’s failures through uncontrolled behavior?
Answer by Dr. Florica Trandafir, sexologist
In the life of any couple there are difficult moments, which can turn, through risky attitudes, into fears, lack of trust, panic, and sexual inhibition. We will list the most important ones.
The accusatory reproach.
Most women feel tempted to accuse the man, declaring themselves dissatisfied with his poor erotic performance. This is a big mistake and a risk, because criticism or loud protest is unpleasant for most men who experience sexual failure.
Uncontrolled anger.
Even more risky is the passionate attitude of the woman, which can take the form of insults, verbal aggression, or even physical aggression. I want to tell you the case of a young man, newly married, who was unable to satisfy his wife twice in a row, for which she beat him severely. From this shock, the young man became psychologically inhibited, and the couple ended up separating. Worse still, over the course of his life, the young man — meanwhile married again — was sexually blocked at the slightest harsh attitude from women (raising the voice, reproach, intention of violence) and remained so for almost 18 years, until he found an extremely understanding and tender partner who managed to heal him. Therefore, I advise women never to raise their voice or their hand if they want to have erotic harmony!
Irony, mockery, derision
are attitudes that show a lack of respect and understanding toward the man. No one enjoys, in an embarrassing situation (which can be passed through elegantly and discreetly), being humiliated with offensive nicknames. I will bring up a case that ended in a definitive breakup between two young people who seemed made for each other. The boy was not a “weak, spineless” man. Sensitive and proud by nature, he was deeply hurt by his wife, who did not know how to soothe his pride, avoiding any comment about moments of erotic failure (which are not absent in any couple).
Ostentatious indifference, dangerous silences.
Such attitudes are also not beneficial to the couple. It is best to wait, with optimism, tolerance, and delicacy, for another occasion, better preparing the ground (rest, good mood, time, atmosphere, etc.).
Seeking refuge in another man’s arms
is the riskiest attitude. A man has intuition and senses when the woman is cheating on him. This way, the definitive step is prepared for a breakup that cannot ensure the adulterous woman her erotic ideal.
_____________
1995, FEMEIA MODERNĂ
12 methods to save the couple
At the moment of deciding to form a couple, ask yourself: “What do I expect from him and what am I ready to give in return?” If he dreams of living in the countryside, and you are convinced you will change his desires, it is possible you will remain in the city, but… alone!
Learn to use the pleasant memories of the beginnings to “feed” the current relationship (“Do you remember that night spent at the cabin or at the seaside…”). Omit, however, unnecessary details, so that you fall once again into each other’s arms.
Listen with interest, without feeling offended, to your partner’s opinion, especially if it is different from yours. Nothing is more dangerous to the stability of the couple than the tendency to establish the equation: 1 + 1 = 1. This way, the personality of either partner can be stifled.
Avoid “verbal terrorism,” just for the sake of saying something or imposing your point of view, as well as bringing up trivial subjects. How many couples break up because of endless reproaches about the toothbrush or underwear thrown around in disorder?
Beware of a superficial approach to problems in the conjugal bed. The effect is disastrous!
Do not forget the small displays of tenderness (a phone call, “just to hear his voice,” at work, or sending his favorite cake).
Take, from time to time, a little vacation, letting him spend an evening or a weekend alone.
Consider the couple as a delicate “ecosystem,” with a sensitive thermometer for adjusting details. If you feel the atmosphere has heated up or your ears are burning because of the “local authorities” overhearing, count to 20 until your thoughts return to normal temperature, so you can resume the discussion.
Respect the “golden rule” of conflict: never use, when discussions arise in the couple, the words: “never” or “forever.” They can be fatal!
Wisely get over the unpleasant “discovery” that your partner maintains a flirtation or has had a casual relationship with someone else. Of course, infidelity leaves marks, but above all, do not use the opportunity to take revenge. It is catastrophic!
Completely avoid offensive remarks and invectives. These erode and kill, like cancer cells, the stability of the couple.
There is no recipe for how a partner can react in certain moments of life, such as: the birth of the first child, unemployment, or other professional troubles. In such situations, if you cannot manage the crisis in the couple, seek support, but not from family or friends — rather from a neutral interlocutor.
The formula for couple stability lies in maintaining balance: 5 to 1. That is, 5 good moments for every conflict. How is your score in your couple?
________________
1995, FEMEIA MODERNĂ
MATRIMONIAL… SCENARIOS
“My husband, Ionuț, prefers quick, almost hurried sexual intercourse (although repeated), and this has not improved with age. I like intimacy to be preceded by a genuine foreplay, consisting of various maneuvers, techniques, kisses, caresses, even a little exciting dialogue.
My man, however, feels almost vexed each time. He reproaches me that such things tire him and seem like a… chore. I don’t know what to think. Am I a difficult woman or a normal one? And Ionuț, is he deficient in this department?”
Answer: Psychologist Maria Șerban-Predescu
The charm of successful intimacy does not consist in the rapid completion of sexual intercourse — except, of course, in special circumstances, at very young, erotically immature ages, when the resulting satisfactions are accordingly modest.
For couples advanced in experience, true sexual fulfillment comes especially in the atmosphere that shapes intimacy.
Most women enjoy the “magical embroidery” of foreplay: tender kisses, subtle insinuations, caresses, which create an optimal emotional state. From this point of view, the expectations you have are perfectly normal.
Differences in rhythm… and nature
Unlike women, most men — especially in this hurried, disorderly decade full of hassles — enter the “sexual start” much more quickly.
We must not forget that a woman always anticipates the possibility of procreation, which brings with it concerns about contraception, the use of condoms, etc. All these can slow down and weaken part of the force of erotic desire.
However, in compensation, nature has endowed the woman with a wonderful gift: the ability to savor pleasure more deeply than the man.
That is why sexual foreplay is absolutely necessary — and it must not be reduced only to physical maneuvers or verbal expressions, but should be understood as the entire erotic environment.
Psychologist’s advice:
Try to change the scenario! On the day you sense that an intimate moment could take place (for example, on the weekend), prepare the ground earlier:
- Give him some expressive looks,
- Caresses and stolen kisses throughout the day,
- Don’t rush to get into bed — prolong the waiting with a little mystery.
Make him understand that a real man is controlled, patient, and receptive to learning, even in the field of erotic techniques.
Important: do not rush him, do not scold him, do not show distrust in his ability to evolve.
Turning a “rabbit” into a proud representative of the male sex requires time, patience, and wisdom.
_____________
1995, MAGAZIN
The lack of love creates solitary women
Far from being an “invention” of the end of the century, feminine solitude is an extremely complex and very old phenomenon. And, equally, difficult to explain — perhaps also because the mechanisms that “push” toward celibacy are multiple and little studied.
Looking “over the shoulder” in time, we turn to figures. Thus, according to statistics, in the year 1880, 73% of women over 50 were single, and of these, 55% were unmarried.
The life of these women was often difficult. Most were housewives, and those who had a profession — usually teachers or nurses — were devoted to their profession and morality.
Women who wished to work were not looked upon kindly by men who wanted submissive wives, homemakers, without pursuits that could have given them a possible upper hand.
The price of professional integration
The specialists’ conclusion is clear: women’s solitude, over time, was often the price paid for their integration and professional success.
In recent decades, women who have embraced professions such as journalism, writing, law, or medicine have claimed the right to live like men — roaming the world and loving only the one who envelops them with tenderness and affection.
But, for them, nothing is easy.
If once single women felt the bitter taste of uselessness and frustration, today things have changed. On a psychological and social level, single women enjoy the desired freedom and autonomy, but also an unparalleled happiness, psychologists say.
What do sociologists say?
Trying to establish some of the causes of feminine solitude, specialists also analyze men’s behavior.
Sociologist Jean-Claude Kaufmann observes that after the age of 25, women find it increasingly difficult to find a partner.
In contrast, as they get older, men look for younger and younger partners. For many of them, age becomes the only selection criterion, with the woman’s real qualities or flaws often being ignored.
But time passes quickly, especially for women. Around the age of 30–35, they begin to hear ever more clearly the biological clock and look with concern at their conjugal future.
And, if today women accuse men for their loneliness, sociologists seem to agree with them.
Because, in a couple, they are the ones who build the edifice, who take on responsibilities, while the men seem to amuse themselves.
Solitude is not the absence of a couple. It is the absence of love.
Philosopher André Comte-Sponville says that it is not the “failure” of the couple that produces solitary people, but the lack of love.
Today’s idea of a couple is completely different from that of a few decades ago. It no longer equates to the total fusion of the partners and the promise of eternal happiness. The couple cannot cancel suffering and anxiety — it is not the antithesis of solitude.
What truly is missing for single women is not the couple, but love.
And to truly love, you must give up the idea that love means the end of loneliness.
You must be ready to accept two solitudes: the other’s and your own.
And to learn that real life is, most of the time, a little different from the one in dreams.
By Ecaterina Bătrâneanu
_____________
1995, MONITORUL DE IAȘI
A drama of the young family in Romania
If there’s no money, there’s no love either!
Romania was recognized for the large number of young people who married for love. Today, this reputation seems to be fading, the number of marriages having dropped considerably in recent years.
Starting a family now is conditioned by socio-economic factors, which often take priority. In our country too, the idea — already established in some Western European countries — has begun to take root, that the family represents an oppressive life system, which hinders the assertion of personality. Thus, there has been a shift toward alternative “lifestyles,” the most common being celibacy, childless marriages, and consensual cohabitation.
Why is the number of marriages decreasing
These trends are generated by the material difficulties that young people face when they decide to start a family and afterward. The uncertainty of tomorrow, the acute lack of housing, and the specter of unemployment have caused the number of marriages to drop.
In 1994, there were 154,200 marriages, 7,374 fewer than in 1993, the largest share being recorded in urban areas. In the first half of this year, there were only 59,000 marriages, 7% fewer than in the same period last year.
The average age at marriage is 24 for men and 19 for women. October is considered the “peak” month for marriages, and April — the least “productive.”
Gorj is the county with the highest number of marriages per thousand inhabitants.
Without a home, without peace
Many young people hesitate to start a family because of the lack of housing. Those who marry, having nowhere to live, are forced to cohabit with their parents, sometimes even with their grandparents, in two or three rooms in an apartment block.
Thus, spouses are stressed by the idea of not being caught making love “in secret” by parents or elderly people with frequent insomnia. A natural relationship thus becomes a real guilt.
Many young families are forced to live in rented homes, in private or state housing, or in singles’ dormitories. Often, living in such a dorm is an act of heroism:
a single room in which to sleep, cook on a hotplate, wash, share a common toilet, and hot water is a luxury.
In these conditions, the life of a young family becomes a nightmare, and if a child appears, everything turns into torment.
Without money you can’t build a home
Choosing a life partner no longer means just sexual or emotional satisfaction. For many women, marriage is equivalent to the “acquisition” of a new wallet, which must be managed rationally.
On the marriage market, the dowry remains an added value to the foundation of marriage. The idea is becoming increasingly common that the young man must have a “business card”: money, a villa, a Western car, preferably with a driver, and possibly a company that brings in “spending” money.
Young people who meet these “qualities” are few. The rest are horrified at the word “marriage,” knowing full well its implications.
Well, money doesn’t bring happiness, but their absence surely destroys love.
Divorce — an increasingly present reality
In the conditions of a precarious life, more and more conflicts arise that lead to separation and, implicitly, to divorce. Their number increased by 7% in the first half of the year compared to the same period last year.
Most divorces occur:
- between the ages of 25–29, for both sexes
- 2–3 years after marriage for men
- 3–4 years after marriage for women
The most cases are recorded in Arad and Hunedoara, and the fewest in Constanța, Mehedinți, and Olt.
In over 50% of divorces, the families already had at least one child.
Do you get tired of your wife quickly?
Is the family perhaps a crystal globe, in which you can see the world in the past, present, and future?
Some voices from Romanian reality:
Mihai Popa, 27 years old:
“I didn’t get married because I don’t think my time has come… and besides, where would I stay? Still with my parents?”
Andreea and Paul N., 26 and 31 years old, engineers:
“We’ve been married for almost 2 years, we rent, and pay 150,000 monthly. There’s no question of having a child — it’s enough that we’re struggling, why would we make an innocent soul struggle too?”
Viorel Anti, 24 years old, construction worker:
“I barely have enough money for myself… how could I have enough for someone else? I still have time for childhood and for a wife. And besides… you get tired of a wife quickly!”
Petre Andrei, 46 years old, foreman:
“I married quite young. I don’t regret it. My wife sometimes ‘supervises’ me, but maybe she’s right. The problem is when the mother-in-law starts with her moralizing. I’d rather go work the field than listen to her!”
Maria Păun, pensioner:
“In my day, marriage was something sacred. Now, one or two, they don’t even know his/her name well, and they run to the church. Then, when they hit hard times, they run to mom and dad. You have to have your head on your shoulders if you want a family, not have it in the clouds. It’s not hard to marry. It’s harder to live together.”
Family — fortress or cage?
Is the family perhaps a fortress into which those outside want to enter, while those inside sometimes try to escape?
ION ȚELEANU
____________
1996, FEMEIA MODERNĂ
3 methods to defuse a quarrel
On some evenings, just one extra word is enough for us to find ourselves in the infernal spiral of family insults…
How do two beings, endowed with reason and in love, end up insulting each other over a tennis racket left lying around or a folded page of a book?
There are, however, a few techniques for extinguishing the flames of conjugal aggressiveness.
- The helping hand
A man who attacks is always a man who suffers. Return the ball to his court by asking him:
“In all the compassion you are capable of, what is wrong?”
Often, that is all he is waiting for. - Partial repentance
When taking in his criticism, admit part of it. For example:
“It’s probably true that I find it hard to forbid the children anything,” but without totally capitulating.
Knowing he is supported, the husband will feel less need to argue all night to prove he is right. - The pause
Propose a truce, with a neutral phrase:
“I’m starting to get angry, let’s take a break” — rather than with an accusatory one:
“You don’t know what you’re saying, let’s stop!”
Decide together when you will resume the discussion. And take advantage of the intermission to take a few steps or listen to some music.
Rodica Oniga
_____________
1996, FEMEIA MODERNĂ
DIALOGUES WITHOUT PREJUDICE
“Marital” rape
— Do you agree with a man forcing his wife to have intimate relations, even though she does not want to?
— Of course not! Such an attitude betrays a lack of respect and consideration for the woman. Can you tell me what this is about?…
— My sister, Irina, has such problems with her husband, Carol. Most of the time, he uses intimidation, verbal aggression, threats, and, in the end, even physical violence to exercise his conjugal rights.
Unfortunately, in her situation, Irina can do almost nothing. However, one clarification is necessary — it is Irina who is most often mentioned. Irina seems to be a woman who almost never wants to have sexual relations with her husband. I have often been told that “Irina is cold, frigid.” For some time now, Irina has refused to categorically respond to her husband’s desires, and then he resorts to reprisals.
— The fact that Irina’s husband has not found an amicable and civilized solution to resolve this true “erotic war” is regrettable. I, however, believe that his wife also has a certain share of the blame, in that she refuses her husband any kind of intimacy.
Could it be that Irina has a lover, with whom she gets along very well, and for this reason systematically refuses Carol?
— It’s possible, she hasn’t told me anything, but I don’t think so, because Irina is a very delicate person and would not confide such an intimacy.
— If that’s the case, the wife’s refusal to have relations with her husband seems plausible, but not the attitude of being cold, distant, and yet faithful to him. On the other hand, Carol’s attitude is partly justified.
I am referring to that type of man who, if his wife legitimizes the refusal to make love with a simple “no,” considers the reason superficial, unserious, ridiculous. The most regrettable thing, however, is that the man resorts to force just because he cannot find paths to his wife’s soul or body.
I would advise any woman to avoid this type of conjugal drama, which creates deep cracks in the couple and risks gradually establishing an unhealthy climate. Irina is urged to reconsider her attitude, because a dejected husband (if that’s the case), to whom everything is refused, who is paying — at least “diplomatically” — needs to have her meet her husband’s needs.
At the same time, he, in turn, should give up force and humiliation, if he wants to win back his wife, instead of alienating her. That is what respect means! What is happening between them now resembles a “reciprocal marital rape.”
Psych. Maria Șerban Predescu
______________
1997, EVENIMENTUL SIBIAN
A few things about… Fidelity and jealousy
Fidelity in the couple is closely tied to the feeling of emotional security, so necessary for each of us.
Jealousy can gnaw at the supporting beam of the new couple until it destroys it completely.
Groundless jealousy often springs from the imagination of more excitable and suspicious people, but also from personality mismatches between the two partners.
In love, fidelity is the rule. Whoever does not like the rule has at hand free love and cohabitation, where obligations of fidelity hardly exist.
Jealousy and love go hand in hand, but only up to a certain limit. Beyond that, jealousy becomes a dangerous disease, hard to treat.
____________________
1997, FEMEIA MODERNĂ
DUPLICITY IN MARRIAGE – a time bomb
The duplicitous attitude, which some people habitually adopt in their relationships with those around them, represents one of the serious “moral maladies” of their personality. The duplicitous person adopts two attitudes or roles between which there is a serious rupture: on the one hand, certain intimate ideas and convictions, and on the other, a way of acting and behaving of another kind.
In family life in general, and in the life of a couple in particular, duplicity is especially harmful. There are numerous cases in which partners realize that they do not know each other even after decades of living together. The moment of revelation, in which the other “shows their true colors,” is painful, generating conflicts, disappointments, frustrations, and the feeling that the entire conjugal life has been a lie.
I began by presenting you with the “dark side” of the matter, but it is necessary to specify that duplicity in the life of a couple involves a wide range of attitudes, from small necessary lies to hypocrisy and deceit.
Simulation
Simulation refers to the effort made by the person in question to make something unreal seem true, deliberately giving those around a false impression about their nature or the purposes they pursue. This falsification of the truth is used to obtain material or moral advantages.
Marriage of convenience falls within the serious sphere of simulated attitudes, when one of the partners (or even both!) secretly pursues only their own well-being, gradually undermining the emotional security of the spouse.
Dissimulation
Dissimulation is a milder form of duplicitous behavior and refers to the conscious effort made to mask, to conceal certain states of mind, intentions, or actions. Even in the case of dissimulation, we must distinguish between the different forms in which spouses hide from each other, for certain reasons, states of mind such as anger, fury, jealousy, or excessive love.
Of course, in real life there are dissimulations with an altruistic nature, or on the contrary, selfish concealments. In the first category falls the dissimulating behavior of the husband who “leaves his troubles at the door” and the wife who hides her concern about the family’s financial problems or the health of one of the children.
In the second category, dissimulation appears as the expression of presenting negative character traits that the husband or wife tries to hide under the cloak of beautiful moral qualities. A wife who is overly tender in public hides aversion toward her partner, just as a husband who showers his wife with gifts conceals a deep feeling of guilt, for who knows what misdeed…
Apart from a few situations in which duplicitous behavior has some mitigating circumstances, there is no excuse for life partners who hide, under the “mask” of honesty and altruism, their petty interests.
Children are the first to notice the “rottenness” of such a conjugal life and will not hesitate to punish it, sometimes too late, when they themselves will have adopted the behavioral model of their own parents.
CRINA TĂNASE, psychologist
________________
1998, AGENDA MAGAZIN
Wrong reasons for marriage
Fear of independence
Anyone who marries out of fear of living independently does so without good reason. There are young people who, when they have to face life by their own means and depend only on themselves, become frightened, refuse this experience, “allow themselves” to fall in love, and get married.
People who have not lived independently for a few years end up regretting that they married too early.
The desire to spite their parents
Because teenagers want to prove to themselves and to the whole world that they are able to think for themselves, without being guided by their parents, they often stubbornly go ahead and get married.
Running away from home
Perhaps the saddest situation is when someone marries not because they feel attracted to a person, but because they are dominated by someone else.
A young woman or young man who can no longer bear the atmosphere at home often feels a strong attraction to the idea of marriage, so much so that they are practically ready to accept anyone just to take this step.
Fear of celibacy
People often make ill-considered decisions out of fear. Those who assume they will have few chances to marry say “yes” at the first proposal, without considering the qualities of the one who makes it.
Therapeutic marriage
One of the psychological errors that brings great misfortunes in a marriage is pity for the other. Usually, the action fails.
The one who marries to be a therapist to their partner risks ending up with behavior opposite to what they intended, which worsens the situation.
- I. B.
________________
1998, COTIDIANUL
The advantages and disadvantages of celibacy
Advantages:
- Singles have a home equipped with the newest and most modern appliances meant to ease and beautify their life.
- They spend much time in the company of the computer or television.
- They spend more money on clothing, cosmetics, and hobbies.
- They have a much more intense social life (attend parties, go to restaurants, discos, shows).
- They can afford a vacation abroad much more often.
Disadvantages:
- Singles get sick more often than their married peers.
- Their life schedule is usually irregular (irregular meals, mostly made up of canned or cold food, going to bed late).
- They are often heavy smokers.
- They often suffer from depression and insomnia.
- They are lonely and sad during holidays and vacations.
______________
1998, FEMEIA MODERNĂ
From the secrets of the non-aggression pact between MOTHER-IN-LAW AND DAUGHTER-IN-LAW
Treat your daughter-in-law, from the very first meeting, as if she were your own daughter.
Do not share with her the wish you had of seeing your son married only in a few years’ time.
Even if she broke one of the crystal glasses, do not reproach her.
Living together? Let her enjoy washing and ironing the linen and clothes of your son.
Do not hint that she is clumsy at housework and make room for her in the kitchen whenever she wishes to prepare a “culinary surprise” for her husband.
Control your curiosity and do not rummage in their room and among their things.
Do not try to advise the young couple on financial matters or in any other situations, unless they ask for your opinion.
Do not interfere in disputes between the two and do not take your son’s side, especially if it is his fault; ideally, try to take her side.
When the young couple wants to go to a show, do not complain that you have not seen a film in a year and have not entered a venue in two years!
With their first child, give them all the support, but leave them the freedom to raise and educate him as they see fit.
Very important! Treat your daughter-in-law as you would have wanted your mother-in-law to treat you.
Margareta Chelbașu
_____________________
1998, FEMEIA MODERNĂ
The parapsychologist’s advice
“My husband, being an alcoholic, committed suicide.
Although you made me aware of my past life and advised me not to rush into a new marriage, loneliness and the hardships of everyday life led me to remarry. My current husband is a widower, his former wife having died last year of cirrhosis following alcoholism. In our apartment, nightmarish things happen. The furniture creaks, at night there are bangs on the doors, in the walls there is a ticking like a clock that turns into the creak of a door. The noise moves from wall to wall. One night, my husband jumped out of bed, turned on the light, and told me that someone had slapped him on the cheek. His face was red, and he was struggling with someone to keep their hand from hitting him again. Lately, things have been going very badly for him. Although he is a good craftsman, he barely finds work. It’s as if luck is running away from him, from us.”
Answer:
Dear A.E., the fact that you remarried a decent man is encouraging. You have managed to break away from the misfortune that was predestined for you regarding men. However, you do have worrying problems with the soul of your current husband’s former wife, a soul transformed into a ghost, which haunts your home, slaps him out of malice and jealousy, and makes noises meant to destroy your peace at home. To get rid of its unpleasant visits, I give you the following advice:
urgently call a priest to bless the home;
place a head of garlic on top of each cupboard in the house to drive away the ghost;
keep a light on in the bedroom all night;
if your husband is attacked again by the unseen being, he should defend himself with a knife, striking in the direction from which he feels the aggression coming, and you should walk through the room with a lit candle in your hand;
I will send you two Christian rituals for banishing demons. Use them both;
do not be frightened and do not lose your courage! If you show weakness and fear, you will end up at the mercy of the demon into which the deceased has transformed!
Compiled by NINA PETRE, parapsychologist
__________
1998, MONITORUL DE IAȘI
Divorced woman = certificate of poor quality
For Romanians, excessive consumption of alcoholic beverages is one of the main causes of divorce. Due to their upbringing, both men and especially women consider that a possible separation from their life partner would constitute a stigma for the rest of their lives.
In divorces among the intellectual class, things often descend into all sorts of pettiness in order to prove the guilt of the husband or wife before the court.
The family, considered the basic cell of the society of the second millennium, will probably remain, long after the year 2000, the same micro “institution” revolving around the interests of two people – normally, a man and a woman – brought together as a result of a complex of factors.
Upbringing and social prejudices
European and North American civilizations have imposed as a standard the dynamic family, in which the woman occupies a place at least as important as her life partner. In Romania, however, for more than 40 years, thousands of “Hero Mother” medals were awarded, and the party and state interest, summed up in the slogan “the country needs as many children as possible,” overlapped with a rigid upbringing that generated complexes and prejudices.
Here is what the co-workers of a factory worker, recently divorced, said:
“Does comrade Ionescu really not realize the gravity of the situation? To leave comrade Ionescu, a pillar of our town, just because he drinks a glass now and then, like any man? And so what if he hit her, she deserved it, don’t you see how she walks around with her eyes painted and skirts up to the knee?”
The moral rigors imposed by the socialist state and the fear of becoming a subject of gossip have often made women dissatisfied with their relationship give up the idea of separation. Compromise forced them to endure, beyond acceptable limits, their wrong choices.
The label: “Divorced woman”
Two otherwise ordinary words – “divorced woman” – came to be equated with a certificate of poor quality, regardless of the real causes that led to the breakdown of the marriage.
In socialist-type courts, a “cooling-off period” of 6 months was given, in the hope of reconciliation. Even after the regime change, many do not find the strength to give up life as a couple, even when love has turned into hatred.
Why can’t they stay together?
The most common causes of divorce:
- excessive alcohol consumption;
- infidelity;
- extreme jealousy;
- financial precariousness;
- modest education.
Romanians, being among the biggest consumers of alcohol in Europe, come home with frustrations and anger, often taking it out on their partners.
“Why isn’t dinner ready?”,
“Where’s the Playboy magazine?”,
“I told you not to give me beer without peanuts!”,
“You move like a snail around the house!”,
“Don’t let me catch you watching those idiots from ‘The Sheik’!”,
“You didn’t take out the trash, you just stared at yourself in the mirror all day!”
All these are real quotes from divorce files in Iași courts, repeated by women who could no longer bear the humiliation.
Man as master, woman as slave
Many men still see the wife as a slave, housekeeper, and sexual satisfaction tool, without accepting the idea of partnership. The lack of mutual respect inevitably leads to separation.
A university professor lifted her skirt in front of the judge to show her bruises
Judge Valeriu Diaconii, president of the Iași Court of Appeal, has participated as a judge in dozens of divorce cases.
“There were cases where, although the spouses before the court were part of the so-called upper class, I felt embarrassed to belong to the intellectual category and had more respect for a certain Gheorghe from the countryside. Among intellectuals, sometimes they went beyond all limits of decency to prove the other guilty. A university teacher lifted her skirt over her head to show me the bruises caused by her husband, while he took a rolling pin out of his bag, claiming that his wife had beaten him,” judge Valeriu Diaconu told us.
Also, as an unusual fact, during a divorce trial, a university professor asked the court that, in addition to dividing the common goods, it should also consider splitting a packet of coffee and a bottle of wine that the professor had brought from Italy.
As a general observation, it has been noted that intellectuals often resort to extreme pettiness to prove their innocence in front of judges. Jealous men have followed their wives as in bad police movies, taken “compromising” photographs, and brought to court witnesses “dragged in” off the streets of Iași.
Property acquired before marriage is not divided at divorce
The most difficult task a judge faces during a divorce trial is related to awarding custody of the children from the marriage. In modest families with low incomes, usually the husband gives up custody in favor of the wife. The law states that the court must consider the best interest of the child, and if there are several children, the judge aims not to separate them.
An important issue in a divorce is the division of assets acquired during the marriage. If at one point the principle was 50%-50%, later it was found fairer to consider each spouse’s contribution to purchasing the assets.
“The contribution a wife makes to a family must be taken into account, even if she is not salaried. The woman’s contribution to the household, according to judicial practice, can be quantified, evaluated, thus leading to the recognition of a contribution equal to that of the employed husband,” Valeriu Diaconu also told us.
The law states that assets acquired by either spouse before marriage cannot be subject to division, regardless of how many years after the marriage the divorce occurs. The same regime applies to assets obtained during the marriage by one spouse as a result of an inheritance, as well as winnings from gambling.
Divorce trials – between reality and wear and tear
Divorce trials can be held, upon request, behind closed doors if the judge considers that the two spouses are discussing matters that could affect their dignity, prestige, or have negative consequences on the children.
Completely unaware of their children’s fate, entangled in exhausting trials that sometimes last up to two years, many of those who give up their life partner are left after divorce with the most unpleasant memories, perhaps even with trauma. Some have the strength and luck to rebuild their lives, while others never manage to escape the nightmares of the past.
(Adrian Onciu)
_____________
1999, LIBERTATEA
Wives are better for a career than being single
A study conducted by statistical specialists of the U.S. government came to a surprising conclusion: married men and those with children have more success in their profession than bachelors.
The authors of the study state that married men surveyed earn, on average, $2,000 more per year than unmarried men. They also say that this difference is due to the psychological comfort offered by a harmonious family life.
“Love affairs in which single men get involved usually do not provide them with balance,” the American statisticians say.
Moreover, unlike marital relationships, these unconventional loves create stress, which has negative effects on the careers of both partners.
____________
1999, REVISTA 22, free supplement, no. 85
(…)
Majority vs. individual
The word “homosexual” first appeared in medico-legal language in Germany in 1869. Interestingly, it preceded by 11 years the term heterosexual! The majority defined itself after a minority and in relation to it. I do not know if, linguistically, this has ever happened before. But axiologically, yes: to establish the norm, to fulfill the criteria of the majority, you must have a term of comparison; you must be made aware of the existence of a point where the norm does not apply. This may be outside the norm, but it is precisely what defines it. As Leslie Marmon Silko, a writer of color from America, said: “We invented white people.”
And because around the shared norm, the majority should therefore be ecstatic about its normality. Only things don’t happen like that. I have never seen two teenagers hugging on the street and shouting: “And you’re heterosexual? Ah, you should come to our club!” Because there is not just one norm. Sexuality is one; ethnicity, religion, social class, education are other norms. And they are so many and so intertwined that, if you draw the line, you find that the majority does not exist. No one wants to be “thrown into the same pot” with a lot of people because of a single common trait. No one wants to be held accountable for a lot of people with whom they have only one trait in common. Or no one should have to be accountable.
Because what never ceases to amaze me, in any interview, newspaper article, etc., is that, after dictating the rule and ranking according to that rule, the majority feels entitled to break all the other rules. A homosexual invited to a talk show is invariably asked about his personal life; whereas, as far as I know, this is a violation of one of the oldest norms of social coexistence, if not simply impolite. He must account for all the deeds, intentions, or presumed intentions of those rejected based on the same norm from Eden to Geneva. The message is multiplied by the magazines themselves: “this is the rule and you don’t meet it, this is abnormal: do you understand that you are abnormal and, curiously, how abnormal are you?”
In a country where hot-line promos for heterosexual men depict scenes of lesbianism, and soap operas have no intelligent enemies, I myself feel among barbarians.
Emilia Stere
Let’s be proud
The situation of gays and lesbians has been bad, is bad, and will always be bad. This is one of the most frequent verdicts heard from gays and lesbians I have met during my work within the partnership project between NVVH-COC (Dutch National Organization for Gay and Lesbian Advocacy) and ACCEPT.
Looking back, I can conclude that in this country change — even if it is change — is slow. I believe, after more than a year and a half of concerns regarding the situation of gays and lesbians in Romania, that I sometimes feel tired, even irritated.
The first response to these problems concerns the amendment of the Penal Code (adding Article 200), which did not occur when we expected it to happen, even after years and years of effort.
Perhaps the second response to these problems is that gays and lesbians in Romania do not see an immediate and concrete interest in their daily lives. First of all — indeed — there are still no jokes, shops, and magazines of the minority, no real mass media that shows homosexuals existing if they hold hands with their partners on the street.
It is, however, also time to note that in June and December 1998, 13 articles about ACCEPT and its activity appeared in the most important newspapers and in all the publicity. In the same period, ACCEPT was invited to participate in 4 TV programs and 4 radio programs. The most frequent attacks came from people at ACCEPT social meetings, who asked not to hide their sexual identity, the identity they openly assume. Is this not a clear sign of success? Moreover: ACCEPT sent the Ministry of Justice its own draft law to amend Article 200. Last but not least, ACCEPT supports other gay and lesbian groups in the country.
Let’s be proud of our movement for defending the rights of sexual minorities. Let’s celebrate keeping ACCEPT alive. Let’s be proud that we are gay and lesbian and defend this belonging as something noble and precious. The greatest enemy of the gay and lesbian community is no longer the author, but ignorance, negativism, and lack of initiative.
Dennis Van Der Veur
_____________
2000, CRONICA ROMÂNĂ
Jealousy – an emotion more natural than we would like to admit
Whether we like to admit it or not, each of us has felt the sting of jealousy at least once in our lives. Although it is considered an unpleasant side of human character, the truth is that jealousy is just as natural and hard to explain as love.
To better understand the matter, it must be known that “jealousy” does not only mean the pain felt by someone who considers themselves abandoned by the loved one (in the erotic sense), but it is a much broader term.
Jealousy is hard to avoid and appears closely linked to the individual’s relationships with others: mother, friends of the same sex or from “the opposing camp,” co-workers, and even pets.
Types of jealousy (according to psychologist Mazur):
Envy-jealousy
Affects self-centered people who cannot bear their partner to be superior in any respect.
Possessive jealousy
Found in those who consider themselves… the owners of their partner, not respecting their right to opinion and freedom.
Exclusion jealousy
It is in fact the fear of being excluded from the sphere of interest of the loved one, even when neglect is caused by work problems or external relationships.
Competition jealousy
The only form of jealousy that can become beneficial. It refers to comparison with those around, which can lead to self-improvement – in career or personal life.
Egocentric jealousy
Appears when one of the partners declares that the other is the “leader,” but acts as if they are the one making all the decisions (valid for both sexes).
Restless jealousy
Frequent anxious and insecure people, who live with the constant fear that they will upset or be rejected.
Conclusion
Jealousy is, in essence, the fear that an important relationship might suffer. From this results the tendency to become possessive, which amplifies frustrations and the feeling of insecurity.
_________________
2000, FEMEIA MODERNĂ
Routine, the greatest enemy in marriage
When boredom creeps into the couple
When boredom begins to creep into a couple’s life, it is a clear alarm signal.
The routine that sets in a marital relationship – as a result of major events such as the birth of a child, the influence of relatives, physiological changes due to age – can, over time, kill love.
A turning point: the birth of the first child
The first profound change in the life of a couple occurs with the arrival of the first child.
Many parents focus their attention exclusively on the newborn, and in time give up their own intimacy.
The situation often worsens with the birth of the second child.
But it is not only poorly understood motherhood or fatherhood that leads to the breakdown of marriage.
Losing a job, professional stress – felt more strongly by men – accentuates distancing, while women tend to find refuge in the household, raising children, and caring for their husband.
Strangers under the same roof
The two spouses, once deeply in love, end up feeling like strangers, avoiding intimacy, even refusing to discuss their problems.
They feel frustrated and eventually begin to hate each other.
For one of them, coming home becomes a real torture.
Lack of communication affects the physical relationship
Lack of communication and absence of common interests inevitably lead to the cooling of intimate relations:
- the spouses no longer caress each other,
- they no longer kiss as before,
- sexual relations become increasingly rare and, eventually, disappear completely.
Can one love for a lifetime?
Is it possible to love someone until the end of life?
Thousands of couples say yes, it is possible.
What is their secret?
Each couple has a personal reason, but one thing is certain:
“Love cannot be maintained without effort.”
– Loredana Spahiu
___________
2003, FLACĂRA IAȘULUI
A never-ending story: jealousy
Svetlana NEDELCU
If we think about it, we could say that jealousy is as old as humanity, the first biped afflicted by this torment being, probably, some cave-dweller “stung” by the sweet words, unintentionally poisoned, of his innocent half, who must have shown delight, loudly, at (tsk tsk tsk!)… the ingeniously patched “Bermudas” made of mammoth fur of the neighbor across the way; or at his bravery in tethering some fierce beast that was sneaking around his herd of bison; or…
One thing remains certain, in any case:
If for some men and women jealousy is the mandatory spice of true love, for others, and they are not few, this feeling would not only degrade the dignity of the “thinking reed,” but would have no real connection with love.
And when it comes to the jealous, it seems that from the Stone Age, through Shakespeare’s and Caragiale’s heroes, and up to the haughty managers or Internet café owners, there are not many big differences in how this “disease” manifests itself.
At least, these conclusions are clearly drawn from the answers of a few respondents to a quick survey “on the topic”:
Răzvan, 26 years old:
“(…) Oh no, no question of jealousy! It would be pure nonsense to be jealous when it is known that, all over the world, women outnumber men. So, if one of them plays some nasty trick on me (it has happened before), then bye-bye! Next in line, because, as they say, I have plenty to choose from!”
Lola, 32 years old:
“God forbid I catch him with someone or even hear that he’s cheating on me with some tramp! I don’t even want to think about it, I can’t conceive that he could be so vile as to do something like that to me after all the sacrifices I made to keep us together! That I didn’t listen to my parents or anyone who advised me (sic!) that I should leave him, because he’s not right for me and doesn’t deserve me.
Honestly, I think I’d be capable of murder if he cheated on me. But, to be honest, I don’t think he’d bother running after others: he’s so… how should I put it?… a bit of a dimwit, poor guy!”
Vanda, 18 years old:
“Ha-ha, if only God would make him cheat on me, damn it, just once! I can’t wait, because that would be the perfect excuse for me to get rid of him. He’s so boring and drives me crazy with his lifeless love. It’s like he’s my grandpa!”
Marian, 50 years old:
“Well, dear lady, with this transition of ours, which no one knows where it will lead, who still has the will and time to think about… jealousy? Mine doesn’t ‘cheat’ on me anymore, poor thing, except with those scoundrels on TV. Those who act in soap operas, yes, as you say… Eh, when I was younger, I admit I was a bit more jealous.
For example, of one of my bosses: that guy had a Mercedes! It was either given to him as a gift or sold to him by a former schoolmate who had fled ‘abroad,’ and he drove us all crazy with that car!”
Alin, 45 years old:
“Jealousy? Just one more humiliation in this life, which is already miserable enough! Tell me, am I wrong? If she doesn’t love me anymore, what can I do?
Tie her to the radiator so she won’t run off with some bastard younger than me? Never!”
Gabriel, 31 years old:
“Love and jealousy are incompatible, madam! Only a madman would smear his love for his woman with all kinds of suspicions and crazy thoughts.
That’s my opinion, even if I don’t have much experience in these matters.”
Lórin, 29 years old:
“The worst is when you know for sure that she loves you and yet her eyes still wander to someone else!
Well, then let’s see what you do, because you don’t even feel like hitting her, since you love her and, in a way, you feel sorry for her for making a mess of her life.”
____________________
2003, RONDUL
How to catch a cheater?
Infidelity in the age of technology
The suspicious have at their disposal a wide range of surveillance systems, from wireless cameras to video cameras “disguised” as clocks. An American entrepreneur takes full advantage of the fact that, in the internet age, even infidelity is no longer what it used to be.
Determined to make a fortune, John LaSage has put up for sale, through a website, more or less sophisticated technical devices intended for those who suspect their partner is cheating.
“I don’t believe spying on the other person is healthy in a relationship. But, on the other hand, you can’t just overlook infidelity if you don’t have proof it exists,” says LaSage.
A site for ‘broken hearts’… and more
LaSage’s website, www.chatcheaters.com, is not just a meeting place for “broken hearts” looking for advice on how to rebuild life after a romantic failure. Here you can also find a vast selection of spying devices, including one invented by a Romanian.
The ‘anti-infidelity’ product range
For suspicious partners, the offer is generous:
- Wireless cameras – disguised as a pen, cost $449.
- Video cameras disguised – in alarm clocks, smoke detectors, air conditioners, etc.
- GPS Tracker – locates a car anywhere on the planet, records routes for 18 days, costs $445.
- Spector Internet Monitoring Software – software for only $20 that monitors all activity on a computer (websites, emails, keystrokes, etc.).
- Digital voice recorder – for $200, records up to 16 hours of conversation; easy to hide, just slightly thicker than a regular pen.
- CheckMate – a $50 infidelity test that detects traces of semen on up to 5 pieces of underwear, with results ready in five minutes.
The Romanian who ‘patented’ the vigilant bed
A device invented by Romanian Vasile Prițcă detects cheaters by sending an SMS whenever more than one person is detected in a bed. According to the Boston Herald, the system works based on weight sensors that compare the current weight with the recorded weight of the “official” partner.
________________
2004, JURNALUL NAȚIONAL
VICTORY! Romanians have defeated all regimes with love
Romanians’ appetite for sex was at the mercy of the communists. They issued a decree and hoped we would reproduce as much as they wanted. It wasn’t like that. It was dramatic. But Romanians never lost their desire to make love. More in an old-fashioned way. Even now, when sex shops in Bucharest are just like those in Amsterdam, Romanians make love without too many sophistications.
– MAGDA MARINCOVICI
Love at the price of the decree: The 1950s–1980s in Romania
In the 1950s, the example of the Soviet Union was reflected in all aspects of life, including family planning. Following the model imposed by the former USSR, Romania legalized abortion on request in 1957 — thus becoming the only official method of fertility control.
Between 1957 and 1966, for just 30 lei — about the price of a bottle of wine — Romanian women could terminate an unwanted pregnancy. But suddenly, in 1966, the authorities in Bucharest radically changed abortion policy: starting October 1, Decree 770 came into effect, banning abortion on request, with extremely limited exceptions (cases of rape, incest, or mothers over 45 years old).
All contraceptive methods were banned, and at the same time so-called pro-natalist incentives appeared — all with the goal of stopping the decline in birth rates. Between 1966 and 1989, sexually active Romanian women lived through a true Middle Ages. Fear, terror, stress, bribery, and even death became daily realities for any couple who wanted to make love safely.
On the legal market there were no contraceptives, not even condoms. The luckiest could obtain them “under the table,” but the quality was dubious. Not coincidentally, condoms were nicknamed “galoshes.”
The infamous decree also provided severe penalties for doctors who performed, and women who underwent, illegal abortions. Those caught risked up to 10 years in prison. The effects were disastrous: the number of illegal abortions exploded, performed with the most dangerous objects – bottles, spinning spindles, sticks, even vitamin C, used empirically to “interrupt” a pregnancy.
The marital bed had become the bed of Procrustes: sexual intimacy and pleasure were amputated by the absurd norms of the decree. For a short time after the decree came into force, birth rates recorded a jump – from 14 to 27 newborns per thousand inhabitants. But the price was dramatic: cohorts of unwanted children — the so-called “decreței” — were born, and thousands of women lost their lives following makeshift abortions.
Thousands of children were left orphans and sent to state orphanages, thousands of men were widowed, and numerous doctors and nurses ended up in prison for violating the odious Decree 770. The decision for an abortion belonged not only to the doctor but also to the prosecutor.
Romania soon became the country with the highest maternal mortality rate in Europe. Officially, between 1966 and 1989, over 10,000 women died as a result of abortions performed in unsanitary and dangerous conditions. In addition, it is estimated that about 100,000 children were placed in state institutions by families who could not afford to raise them.
Paradoxically, after a brief revival of birth rates, the trend once again declined, reaching values similar to those from the period when abortion was legalized.
In bed with the party
Political control over intimate life worked perfectly. The party knew everything: employees’ romantic escapades, divorce intentions, leaving the marital home — all influenced promotion chances or salary increases.
That does not mean Romanians became monks. On the contrary — they had sex with neighbors, at work, had illegitimate children. The decree did not stop them, it only pushed them into hiding. Anywhere they found someone willing to lose their head, risking it, they would do it — with passion and fear.
After 20 years
After the fall of the Ceaușescu regime and the liberalization of abortion, Romanian women drew a clear conclusion: we have sex, but we don’t have children. Romania became the European leader in abortion rates, and although declining, the phenomenon remains at high levels.
With only a few exceptions and changes, the new abortion legislation does not differ much from that of 1957. “In recent years, widespread use of induced abortion has been reported. Romania’s rates are close to those of the Russian Federation,” notes Dr. Alin Stănescu, deputy director of the Institute for the Protection of Mother and Child.
The supply of contraceptives has diversified significantly, but demand is still low. Obstetrician-gynecologist Daniel Popescu points out that “the range of local and general contraceptive products is very rich, with a significant proportion of hormonal methods.”
This unfortunately reflects poor sexual education and the persistence of an outdated concept: that the woman must take sole responsibility for family planning.
From ‘galoshes’ to flavored and beaded condoms
Last September, the results of a survey by Mercury Research on contraceptive use were made public.
The survey, conducted on 451 women between 18 and 60 years old, shows that in Romania, as in most European countries, the condom is at the top of contraceptives, followed by pills and the calendar method.
The explanation is complex:
“The condom is relatively cheap, the offer is very diverse, it is a method with a very low chance of resulting in a pregnancy, it protects against sexually transmitted infections, it is easy to use,” says Daniel Popescu, senior obstetrician-gynecologist.
Currently, the range of condoms in Romania is similar to that in EU countries. Condoms with various flavors, in different colors, with ridges, beads…
They are used especially by young people who are increasingly aware of the dangers of unprotected sex.
___________
2006, GAZETA DE SUD
Emotional and sexual infidelity
Camelia CIOCĂNARU
From whichever angle you look at it, infidelity is the surest and shortest road to the end of a relationship. Almost every time one partner cheats on the other, trust is lost and the chances of regaining it are slim.
Two types of infidelity
According to research by specialists, two types of infidelity are known so far.
First, there is sexual infidelity, when the man has no feelings for his partner and is only interested in the satisfaction he gets with her in bed.
The second type of infidelity is emotional. This occurs when a man feels emotionally attracted to another woman. He finds the company of a woman other than his partner pleasant, enjoys being around her, likes talking to her, and they confide in each other. Eventually, the man wants to spend his free time with her and not with his partner or wife.
A recent study shows that 75 percent of women feel more betrayed by emotional infidelity than by sexual infidelity. The same group of women stated that it is very difficult to draw the line between the two types of infidelity because both hurt the partner’s feelings, regardless of the level of the relationship.
Emotional infidelity
This type of infidelity is, in most women’s opinion, more dangerous for a relationship.
Women are aware that, besides them, there are many other beautiful women and men are visually stimulated. This does not excuse sexual infidelity, but it is well known that some men find it difficult to control their sexual desires.
The situation becomes even harder for a woman to bear when she finds that her partner is becoming very attached to another person. She often feels she no longer interests her partner and no longer meets his emotional needs.
This behavior is harder to detect. Sexual infidelity is easier to prove. One can find out whether two people have had sexual relations or not, but what exactly defines emotional infidelity from a woman’s point of view?
Relevant example
A relevant example of emotional infidelity is when a man goes out several times with a female colleague for discussions after work, usually in a public place.
In most cases, the two talk about much more than a simple work issue. Over time, an emotional bond is created between them through which they exchange thoughts and feelings.
Men who are emotionally unfaithful begin to wonder whether or not to keep meeting that woman, because they are aware that she means more to them than just a friend or colleague and they feel a certain guilt.
Virtual infidelity – how dangerous is it?
Another example of emotional infidelity that has gained more and more ground lately is virtual infidelity. A man may stay connected online for hours to talk to a particular person. The conversation with her becomes increasingly interesting, and the man loses track of time, so his wife or girlfriend reproaches him for spending too much time on the computer. The cheater becomes more interested in the virtual conversation than in spending time with his partner.
This example best illustrates infidelity. If the man has never seen that woman before, he is less influenced by the thought of sexual infidelity.
When women are looking for a partner, they carefully analyze his emotional and intellectual behavior, trying to imagine him as a father and husband. Men, on the other hand, tend to focus more on the partner’s physical qualities, even wondering if she is capable of fulfilling their sexual fantasies.
It has been proven that women invest a lot of affection in a relationship. For this reason, they feel betrayed and disappointed when they find that their partner prefers the company of another woman, even if there has been no sexual relationship.
Sexual infidelity
The second type of infidelity is sexual. When a man makes love to another woman, his partner begins to question his abilities in bed and wonders what the other woman offers that she does not.
Thus a vicious circle is created: the man cheats on his partner, she no longer wants to make love to him, which leads him to spend even more time with the other woman. This is the beginning of the end of the relationship.
This type of infidelity most often occurs in the context of a one-night stand. The man is not emotionally attracted to the woman and does not want to spend more than one night with her. In general, he is emotionally attracted to his partner, but perhaps routine has intervened in their sexual relationship or he feels the need to try something new.
In most cases, when the man’s affair is discovered, his partner no longer gives him the benefit of the doubt and does not give him the chance to justify himself, ending the relationship.
Still, the situation is not always black or white. There is also a category of women who place more emphasis on sex, and in general, these women are more focused on their careers and self-image.
Other women who consider sexual infidelity more dangerous for the relationship are those who see their partner as an object used to fulfill their own sexual fantasies. Once sexually cheated on, these women end the relationship because they cannot bear the thought of their partner satisfying other women as well.
It is not hard to identify this category of women because they often do not invest much affection in the relationship, the two do not exchange thoughts and feelings, meaning their relationship is purely sexual.
He cheated. Now what?
A man who has cheated on his partner has two options:
- he can choose not to tell his partner and hope she doesn’t find out,
- or he can admit his mistake and take responsibility.
Men who admit their guilt are at the mercy of their partner, as she is the one who makes the decision. At least they have a clear conscience for admitting their mistake, and it is known that a confessed fault is half forgiven.
Those who hide their affair can make things even more complicated, because when she finds out, the woman will not only be angry that the man cheated, but also that he lied to her and hid the affair.
Whatever the cheater’s choice, he must expect the worst and be aware that if he is forgiven once, it certainly will not happen a second time.
To cheat or not to cheat?
Men who get carried away when they meet a beautiful woman and forget they have a family at home that they could lose because of one night of love should think twice before cheating emotionally or sexually.
Regarding the emotional bond between partners, when the relationship reaches an impasse, the best solution to prevent an affair is for both partners to try to find new ways of communicating and to engage in activities that bring them closer emotionally.
When it comes to a sexual affair, the man should first try to improve the existing relationship and not rush into another woman’s bed. If the relationship simply isn’t working and the partner has an adventurous nature he cannot control, a discussion in the couple is necessary, and perhaps the best solution would be separation.
____________
2010, MAGAZIN
Infidelity is caused by a hormone
Infidelity is not always a sign of a troubled marriage. It is like a disease that destroys the roots of a healthy plant. The news about infidelity is downright shocking. Even though over 90% of married people condemn extramarital affairs, statistics show otherwise. Over 15% of wives and 25% of husbands have a relationship outside their marriage.
The most alarming fact is that these statistics do not mention the emotional impact that infidelity has on the lives of these people. The inconsolable pain and distress most often lead to anxiety, sleepless nights, heavy thoughts, and troubles almost unimaginable. Often, the faithful partner finds the strength to get through this nightmare, yet the scars in the soul remain and can have long-lasting consequences that the two spouses will face for years.
The latest research on infidelity, as shown by studies conducted by researchers at the University of Texas, claims that young women who naturally produce high amounts of estrogen – a hormone directly linked to fertility – are much more likely than women with lower levels of this hormone to change partners frequently or be unfaithful in a relationship.
Kristina Durante, a psychologist at the University of Texas at Austin, believes that “these women are ready to enjoy the opportunities that arise and continue to take advantage of men’s availability whenever they have the chance,” considering themselves more attractive than other women. Previous studies had already shown that women who produce high amounts of estrogen are perceived by those around them as more attractive and more fertile.
From now on, it seems, it will be much harder for unfaithful women to hide their “straying.” According to the latest research, men are much better at detecting infidelity than women. Scientists at the University of Richmond, America, have discovered that men are able to identify a woman who cheats on her partner in 9 out of 10 cases of infidelity. At the same time, researchers say, men are more fearful of infidelity, some even seeing it where it does not exist.
Nevertheless, women are more discreet. They can more easily hide an extramarital relationship, with statistics showing that only 10% admit the fact itself.
If we are to believe American researchers, this means that there is a high chance that many people may fall in love again with the person who first ignited their heart. Studying this type of relationship for over 14 years, psychology professor Nancy Kalish from Sacramento University in California concluded that “these love affairs are nothing like ordinary ones.” The consequences of rekindling a first love can be devastating and sometimes lead to the breakup of the marriages of those who reunite.
Psychologists claim that nowadays, relationships between former lovers are rekindled much more easily thanks to the internet. Could this also be a sign of infidelity based on affection and stored emotions?
Whatever the cause, infidelity causes discomfort, suffering, and all kinds of disturbances. Whether man or woman, the one who ends up in the position of being unfaithful must think about the consequences. Sooner or later, even if some can hide this misstep well, the truth comes to light.
– N. Floria
_____________
2022, DILEMA VECHE
The ideology of guilt
Stela Giurgeanu
The word of the year 2022, according to Merriam-Webster, is gaslighting, a term that defines “the psychological manipulation of a person, usually over a long period of time, causing the victim to question the validity of their own thoughts, perception of reality, or memories, manipulation which usually leads to confusion, loss of confidence and self-esteem, emotional uncertainty or mental instability, and dependence on the manipulator.” The term, whose searches have increased this year by 1,740%, actually originates from a detective play written by Patrick Hamilton in 1938, Gas Light.
The action takes place in 1880s London, having as main protagonists the Manningham spouses. Jack, apparently an ideal, loving, and extremely caring husband, turns out to be a manipulator, weaving around his wife, Bella, an entire spider’s web meant to convince her that she is losing her mind. He hides things around the house, accusing her of misplacing them, exploits her sensitivities by telling her that everything is in her imagination, disappears from home while assuring her that he has been present all along, and insists that the gas lamp light is constant and not flickering, as she “imagines.” Bella, who at first tries to defend herself and exonerate herself, ends up yielding to the scenarios of this “perfect” husband, preferring to believe that she is indeed at fault and losing her mind, rather than suspecting him of manipulation.
Leaving the realm of fiction, the term gaslighting entered public attention only in the 2000s, popularized by Robin Stern, an American psychoanalyst at Yale University and associate director of the Yale Center for Emotional Intelligence, through her 2007 book The Gaslight Effect. It is not a new term, Stern claims, as it had been used in academia since the 1980s in studies on the social psychology of women – “trained to be dependent on the idea of relationship and couple, which imposed on them an extremely exploitable vulnerability, leading them to accept and even internalize flaws instilled by their partners.”
However, not only women are victims of this kind of manipulation, which develops, according to the psychoanalyst, in relationships based on power games. “Although it is most often found in romantic environments, this gas lamp game can happen in any type of relationship where one person becomes so important to the other that the victim does not want to risk upsetting or losing them – such as a boss, a friend, a sibling, or a parent – so they prefer to belittle themselves rather than assert their own personality.”
Gaslighting is therefore a form of manipulation – but what exactly differentiates it from other tactics, such as emotional blackmail or even plain lying?
It is psychic control – because it exploits the deepest insecurities and vulnerabilities, and it is not only about influencing someone into believing something from the outside, but about embedding internal insecurities. Those who use this tactic are masters of appearances, their social mask showing an extremely generous, jovial, authentic person with no secrets, and, most importantly, a very rational person. Therefore, no one could suspect them of hidden plans, although, precisely behind this facade of perfection, the manipulator builds their plans with skill. The victim of such a manipulator will be, on the one hand, disoriented by the social mask of perfection – “He is such a wonderful man, he could never hurt me” – and, on the other hand, afraid that no one would believe them. The victim of manipulation ends up at an impasse. Like any manipulation tactic, the effects can be devastating, says Robin Stern.
Not only does the victim lose self-confidence, but they can sink into an eternal inner journey toward flaws instilled by the manipulator. They will begin to believe they are indeed a worthless person, even a profoundly “bad” one.
“Undermining a partner’s emotions and feelings is a way of denying that partner’s reality. The continuous denial of how the other partner feels about a situation goes hand in hand with convincing them that their perceptions are wrong. The emotional invalidation in those moments has the effect of convincing the other person that they are indeed imagining or making up scenarios, when in fact what they feel or experience is real.” – Robin Stern. (…)
For example, if in a relationship with your partner you find yourself wondering several times a day: “Am I overreacting?”, if you often feel confused, hysterical, if you catch yourself constantly apologizing, if you start lying to avoid disappointment, if you begin to have trouble making even the simplest decisions, and if you start to believe you are going crazy.
Those who use such a manipulation tactic, Stern says, are extraordinary connoisseurs of human nature. They know how to be likable, to gain trust, to make you feel like the most important person in the world, precisely to detect that Achilles’ heel – because when you have complete trust in someone, you reveal all your vulnerabilities – “and these gas lamp manipulators know very well what a powerful tool discovering weak points is.”
Still, why was the term so searched for this year? Merriam-Webster’s explanation is the era of fake news, conspiracy theories, and Twitter trolls – times in which reality is distorted into so many scenarios that you no longer know what to believe or feel.
On the other hand, since gaslighting is not so much about manipulating opinions about the world as it is about oneself, perhaps the answer should also be sought elsewhere – namely, in a society haunted by a swarm of accusatory spirits. When we are blamed daily – we are killing the planet, we do not think correctly or feel morally, we do not raise our children properly, we are not civically involved, we do not exercise, we do not eat healthy, etc., etc. – how does our perception of ourselves change?
Guilty without guilt
Social pressure guides our choices – says Elsa Godart, psychologist and philosopher, author of a 2021 essay En finir avec la culpabilisation sociale: …pour être enfin libre. Godart analyzes social blame from the grassroots level to public speeches on political correctness and ecology, identifying in the socially imposed responsibility from the pulpit a sort of ideological moral tutelage – in fact, a bed of Procrustes.
Society has long been divided into accusers and accused – the pandemic acting as an accelerator of radicalism. That “If you are not with us, you are against us” cancels nuance, calm debate, and the possibility for each person to speak and argue their point of view.
The principles of social guilt, Godart claims, are based on injunctions that come from all sides, and the ideological echoes are felt not only at the grassroots level – be careful what you say, because you never know how your words will be twisted – but even in one’s own mentality.
“Eat five fruits and vegetables a day; sort household waste properly; follow social codes; display a successful life on social media; exercise; be sociable; embrace freedom and be feminist to the tips of your nails (which must be polished); smile… smile all the time, even when things go wrong, even when you are not well, never complain, because it would be politically incorrect, as there will always be someone who suffers more than you; you must have an orgasm, if not, you must have a serious conversation with your clitoris; form political opinions and express them; be positive and get rid of negative thoughts; be a good parent; constantly educate yourself.
All these permanent injunctions, increasingly numerous, more suffocating, more intrusive, have made me no longer quite sure where I stand. And, above all, they have made me feel guilty – a guilt that has invaded my way of thinking and acting, until I gradually lost control of my own existence. And this guilt has infused me with the feeling that I am never able to do anything right.”
Since in today’s society information (which abounds) no longer necessarily means knowledge, but is often used as a tool of manipulation, individuals are prone to a state of confusion – am I thinking correctly, am I acting correctly? – which, according to Godart, paralyzes the freedom to make personal choices.
“This perpetual state of self-doubt kills critical thinking, and if I dare not think fashionably, I immediately feel ashamed of myself, and this attitude creates the premises of a social servitude.”
The culture of personal perfection constantly subjects us to a devastating self-evaluation, since we begin to see ourselves through society’s critical eye. A society which, moreover, urges us to be “the best version of ourselves.” But we are left to wonder whether this best version toward which we are guided is truly ours or that of a society that has embraced the ideology of guilt.
____________
2023, DILEMA VECHE
Always you, never me, or about invisible violence
When we are in any kind of relationship, whether it is love, friendship, or a professional one, and we feel that we have to walk on tiptoe, we might be victims of the phenomenon of “gaslighting,” meaning a form of invisible psychological violence.
The term “psychological violence” has entered the collective vocabulary only a few years ago and has been recognized as a phenomenon that happens and to which we have been and are exposed without realizing it. The same thing happens with gaslighting. It is still little known to us in its true dimension, and we do not even realize how widespread it actually is.
Specialized information has begun to reach us, and many of us can name and understand what is happening to us. And, sometimes, those who practice it are not aware that they are in an internal imbalance and that they are abusing others.
At the root of this phenomenon may be a perverse psychopathic-type structure, which manipulates and distorts, takes things out of context, so that the interlocutor has the feeling that they have not retained and have not correctly understood, their cognitive pattern being “the problem is never with me, but with others because they do not understand what I am saying.”
The one who gaslights is always right, in their own perception. These people are always thirsty for the validation of their own perceptions, obtaining it through the manipulative force of behaviors and words, abusing the other and using the cognitive pattern “I am fine, all those who do not agree with me are not fine, the problem is with you, never with me.”
Sometimes they build an internal dialogue of a delusional type in which they are victims and hold the truth, and the problem is that others do not understand them, wrong them, and are not grateful to them.
The personality structures that operate through this type of invisible violence do not believe they ever make mistakes or, if they admit that they have made a mistake, it is only manipulation, they do not truly internalize the message. What follows is a big “but you also did” with which they bring into the dialogue something to blame the victim for.
In order to be right, they take things out of context and distort the truth, trying to impose it aggressively, sometimes through “street-level” communication, so that the victim, if they do not have enough inner strength and are not aware that they are being subjected to emotional and psychological abuse, will doubt themselves and withdraw, yielding to manipulation and psychological violence.
This happens because it is hard to stand up to an aggressor with a street-like attitude, irrational and with a delusion in which they only want to be agreed with, and even more, to have you apologize for not having understood their truth, which is the only truth, there is no other.
Thus, we observe that aggressors maintain their power through intimidation and psychological abuse.
If we look closely to understand what makes a person get to this point and use gaslighting on others, we will discover, not surprisingly, that they had a childhood in which they were abused and manipulated in exactly this way.
So first, it is a learned behavior from their formative environment, and second, it is a defense mechanism in psychic splitting, produced by suffering caused by the environment, a mechanism developed to defend and survive. In adulthood, it manifests through these passive-aggressive behaviors towards others.
We encounter the phenomenon of gaslighting in different manifestations, such as the muffled tone that betrays simmering inner anger, politeness that we notice being spoken through clenched teeth, belittling the achievements of others, behavioral ambivalence, sometimes friendly, sometimes distant, taking a superior stance and inducing the feeling that you are being done a favor by being seen, inducing altruism as manipulation, lying and denying what they have said or done.
No, we are not mistaken when we notice them – we really are being abused, and the healthiest thing is to get out of such relationships, because there can never be a healthy relationship with someone who never makes mistakes (as if such a person existed) and is not willing to take a step back and reflect on themselves.
No, we are not mistaken, and the best indicator is our body, which signals through tension, a sense of attack, paralysis, or felt strain. When, in a dialogue with someone, we experience these states, the healthiest thing for us is to move on.
There will be no way to compromise because it usually also associates with mercantile, perverse, manipulative character traits, and in the long term, we end up getting sick. Relationships in which we are conditioned to satisfy the huge and irrational ego, most often, of someone else, in which we are made to feel that we are being done a favor and allowed to be around, are based on narcissistic or antisocial structures. The effect is intense psychological suffering.
At the social level, we often encounter the mentality: “Oh, poor thing, what happened to her! But… she/he is also partly to blame,” or “She/He was not careful enough,” or “Her skirt was too short.” Surely you have often encountered various remarks that belong to the realm of the irrational, and yet blame is still found in the one who is the injured party.
As we can see, all these messages that we often hear and that we repeat without being aware of their impact on us, but also on others, bring psychological suffering, invalidate the person, use passive-aggressive communication, a condescending way of addressing, and latent contempt.
Often, these forms of communication are subtle, not necessarily very obvious, so that we can leave the conversation with the feeling that maybe it seemed to us, that maybe we did not retain or understand correctly, that the problem is with us, never with the one who uses invisible violence.
Moreover, the cognitive pattern model proposed by psychiatrist and psychoanalyst Eric Berne, the creator of transactional analysis theory, is well known. One of these cognitive patterns according to which some people operate is: “I’m OK, the rest of the world is not OK,” a pattern which, unfortunately, brings a lot of psychological suffering and a distorted approach to reality.
At the root of this model, most often, we will observe a narcissistic structure, and in some situations, it can intertwine with one of the ugliest character traits: perversity.
Narcissism is formed in infancy, when the child, now an adult, had emotionally unavailable, critical, competitive caregivers who used comparison as a way of upbringing, dissatisfied with the child in front of them.
The narcissist never takes responsibility for anything, displays great skill in distorting the reality of a situation so that they disorient you regardless of how obvious the truth is, victimizes themselves, and will turn you into the aggressor by using labels against you, seeking not only to confuse you but also to invalidate your own judgment and, implicitly, your mental health.
When you are invalidated and unseen, insufficiently loved, appreciated, and comforted, when you are humiliated and wronged, compared, and never enough, one of the wounds we develop is the narcissistic wound, which will manifest in adulthood not only through the obvious narcissism of grandeur and possession but also through the need for attention, often obtained in an inappropriate and loud way, other times through passive-aggressive, manipulative behavioral acts, which can degenerate into psychiatric pathologies as age advances.
And here we have two aspects: highly functional pathologies and pathologies decompensated into delusion and with psychotic elements. Here we can also encounter fanatic structures.
Amos Oz, in his book How to Cure a Fanatic, describes their structure as follows: “In most cases, fanatics don’t know how to count beyond one; two is a number too big for them.” As Oz writes, anyone can become a fanatic, this malignant gene is present in human nature, becoming a personality structure that wants to be right – their right, which is a subjective one – at any cost.
But the fanatic has transformed this way from a need to be seen, to be special, from exposure to trauma in infancy, thus being a narcissist at the base, with added perverse traits and cognitive dissonance.
The term “perversity” comes from the Latin pervertere, which means to reverse, to change meaning. We therefore have a narcissistic structure that needs special attention, manifested subtly through acts of moral harassment (words, behaviors, gestures, facial expressions), through which they reverse the words said by someone else, give them their own interpretation, take them out of context and use them in a truncated way, twist them to highlight themselves and prove that their point of view is the correct one and that they are right, and in the end they demand not only that you apologize, but also that you believe and internalize their truth, to be convinced that they were right and you were in a huge error of thinking.
Practically, not only do they invalidate us, but they plant such confusion that we end up doubting our own judgment, but also our own feelings – a subtle attack on our identity that is hard to detect, and we risk getting sick.
Living in such relationships means, at a biochemical level of the body, a state of alertness, of permanent vigilance, of defense, which involves constant stress that risks becoming chronic and decompensating, after a while, into a mental or physical illness.
The relationships we have have a cost – it depends on how big it is – and many of us, out of fear of loneliness, accept invisible violence. But loneliness is not the biggest bogeyman of our lives; it has many benefits, and, anyway, most of us experience the feeling of loneliness, whether we are in a relationship or have single status.
Cătălina Dumitrescu, clinical psychologist and psychotherapist