The subtleties of temptation
I wonder what the word "temptation" really means. What is its original meaning?
|Galina Timoshenko, psychologist and TV presenter|
I wonder what the word "temptation" really means. Or, in any case, what did it mean in its originality? Sincerely and deeply revered by me, "Dictionary of the Living Great Russian Language" by V. Dahl on this account gives out very funny information: "BLAZN (or blasphemy) - ... mana, hassle, charm. To cripple is ... to tempt, embarrass, seduce, lead to sin ... "It seems to be nothing new. But pay attention: this is not a matter of CO-sickness, but simply of tempting someone, seducing someone
But the prefix “co” decisively changes everything, since it usually means in Russian some kind of compatibility, simultaneity of action, as, for example, in the words “cooperation”, “union”
And then we have a rather curious turn in the conversation about the temptation: temptation is a joint action. Funny right? As a result, the seduced party loses the right to consider itself an innocent victim who fell under the onslaught of others' sinful aspirations. Damn it ... It's okay. Since it is unlikely that the seducer and the seductive read these lines together, we will talk about them separately.
So, the seducer. I propose to divide all the seductive actions into three categories: the temptations of small, medium and large. This, of course, is not about the magnitude of the sin committed as a result of seduction - this is not my part at all. I mean the scope of the goals pursued by the seducer.
With a little temptation these goals are completely innocent: easy flirting, as a result of which each of the participants experiences a very pleasant feeling of unity with their own gender - or even recalls having one at all ... An equally pleasant result is some kind of erotic excitement that does not imply a transition to any kind of It was active in its implementation. In this case, to be honest, I don’t really understand at all whether such a small seduction can be considered a sin at all. Although, of course, if any pleasure - or, in any case, the desire to receive this pleasure - is considered a sin, then yes ...
Medium temptation - another matter. The purpose of this seduction is to get a specific partner for very specific bedding. True, in this case, personally, I am not quite ready to consider such an act sinful or even worthy of any censure. If people are still capable of having sex, then a number of unsuccessful attempts to find the one who wants the same partner can easily be missed. Why suffer, if there is a very specific individual of the other sex, showing with all his strength his intention to do the same, and it is with you ?!
THERE ARE NO VICTIMS IN CONDISTRATION, BECAUSE THE PLEASURE GETS BOTH PARTY
A variation of the average temptation, in my opinion, can be considered the seduction of an existing sexual partner. That is, everything has happened between us on several occasions, and as a result of what is happening, I am not at all against repetition. I perform certain actions reminding my partner of the joint joys we have already experienced. As a result (if it is, of course, achieved), the partner also recalls these joys, and ... Again - who is ill?
And finally, a great temptation. Everything is much more complicated and incomprehensible here. We are talking about situations where a woman (for some reason, most often in such cases it is a woman who seduces ...) seduces in order to create a strong and friendly family. Here for me, a riddle is almost everything. How does a man who fell victim to such a temptation have to guess that the woman has some other plans besides bed ?! And even if he guesses, from which it follows that he should immediately join such plans ?! It is quite possible to imagine a certain average man who is firmly convinced: if a woman tried to seduce him, then what would stop her, having inadvertently become his wife, to want to seduce someone else? And why did he need such a time bomb near by?
Inside this global - contradictions in cases of great seduction, there is another, less noticeable, but no less surprising. A woman seducing with far-reaching intentions - as, however, and seducing with any other intentions - in every possible way demonstrates precisely those qualities that are of paramount importance for sex: the volume and shape of the breast, the bends of the body, the half-open lips, the alluring look ... Moreover for some reason she imagines that behind all this cascade of absolutely irresistible - from the erotic point of view - delights, a man must certainly manage to discern the beauty of her soul. Have mercy, do not forget about the outrageous braking! Imagine: you came to a luxurious social event and you see in front of you a huge table that just bursts with gastronomic abundance. Well, you’ve considered you were floundered with black caviar - you have saliva flowed. Then my gaze fell on the fillet sterlet - dear mother! One more dish, one more ... You yourself understand, at some point the stomach is full of excitement and lust, and you will stop scouring with the greedy eyes all variety of culinary delights. A simple conclusion is quite enough for you: you will not die of starvation today, okay.
So the man is the same! Having looked at your erotic virtues, he calmly calms down at the thought that he definitely has the opportunity to satisfy his needs, and ceases to pay attention to all other components of your attractiveness. Your kindness, caring, tolerance, etc., were left out of his curiosity. A big goal cannot be achieved. All this may also not be a sin - in any case, from my psychotherapeutic point of view - but certainly it does not smell like common sense (unlike small and medium temptations).
Now let's move on to the tempted. Honestly, it’s hard for me to imagine a person who participated in a little seduction - read: in flirting - who would have some complaints about this. Equally, I cannot even imagine who, following the results of average seduction, took part in a specific sexual act and received the corresponding pleasure. No, of course, if he was counting on one level of pleasure, but the level was much lower than that, then yes ... But even then he would be angry not at the very fact of seduction, but at the inadequacy of advertising with the quality of the goods. Only here everything is simple: who in our time believes in advertising ?! You need to check ...
And even not too innocent - as we have already agreed - the victim of great seduction can only be in a claim against an insidious seducer or seducer: if her initial intentions in no way assumed anything so matrimonial ... Just now with the prefix “co "do something ?!
PHOTO: FOTOBANK / GETTY