Readers believe that the truth of life refutes the theories of psychologists

Collisions in the relationship between son and mother, which he discusses in his article “Why doesn’t a boy always grow into a man? "(issue dated January 19 this year) psychologist Tatyana Gaganova, as they say, touched a nerve among our readers.

Parental love and care should not interfere with children building their personal lives. Photo: Natalia CHAIKA

Know how to manage mother's love
This is what the mother of an adult son, signed Olga Petrovna, wrote in a letter that came to the editor by mail: “Every woman gives birth to a child, first of all, for herself. Believe me, no mother gives birth to a son for someone else. And first of all, she sees in him a man who will always protect and love her, regardless of any ups and downs in life. At the same time, the woman may not be aware of this, but this is exactly the attitude she expects from her son.

The whole question is how wise she is as a mother and how skillfully she hides her true feelings. How much she knows how to play and pretend, figuratively speaking. If a woman is not able to control her mother’s love, then, as he grows up, the son will become burdened by her affection, and then friendly relations will not develop between them, and this is exactly what any mother wants. So that her grown son can become her true friend. To appear at the first call. These are the deep feelings that connect mother and son in most cases. And I consider theories about some kind of snow queen and the like simply untenable.”

A very frank review on the Vecherka website was left by a reader under the nickname “commentator”. He also argues with the psychologist, telling his own life story. Here is his transcript with some abbreviations.

“I put a woman on a pedestal”
“I always rejoice when I look at lovers, and in a good way I envy them very much, I even secretly dream about the same thing, because by nature a person is absolutely family-oriented. I love girls, messing with children. And I even noticed that for some reason small children were drawn to me. Here. And yet, throughout my entire conscious (and not so conscious) life, I have never had sexual intercourse, or even kissed. There were no dates (yes, not one, not once), no carrying of briefcases, no holding hands - nothing at all that remotely resembled a friendly relationship.

I grew up in a very loving family. A large family, with a large number of relatives, caring people. Where there were no scandals, drunken quarrels, reproaches “you ruined my life, you’re such a bastard,” quiet hatred and, especially, open disdain for me - I didn’t feel anything like that. But I don’t believe that I can inspire good feelings in girls.

From communicating with my mother, I received evidence of her love in the form of affection and warmth, but as an adult, I have a variety of emotional problems. None of the three situations outlined above apply to me, IMHO. Mom didn’t give birth to me “for herself” so that she would be loved “with a guarantee for life”, she didn’t keep me coldly at a distance and didn’t manipulate me, boasting of her ability to leave me in a fool. But this did not make me an optimist, believing that the world is good and temporary difficulties can be overcome, did not convince me that I am worthy of love, did not make relationships with women easier and more joyful, did not relieve me of the feeling of my own complete insignificance, and certainly not allowed me to accept myself and (horror!) my body.

Before school they took care of me, they only led me by the hand, they categorically did not let me go. But firstly, I developed a complex from this - I pathologically cannot stand it when a woman touches me, much less grabs my hand (and girls, on the contrary, strive to do this, otherwise touches are very important to them). And secondly, we must not forget that the position of “a child basking in parental care and affection” is very beneficial; you quickly get used to it. It's great when they do everything for you. Let them even live for you. Therefore, I stopped showing any interest in life and independence. I was not interested in almost anything except smart books, which I actually read in large quantities.

But no matter what I did, no matter what knowledge and skills I acquired, no matter what skills I acquired, no actions I performed, it did not increase my self-esteem by any means, nor did it add one iota to my self-confidence. By the age of 14-15, I already knew for sure that I had no future and did not foresee that my bitter fate was to bury relatives, inexorably decreasing in number, no one was born around me, but only died. And in general, the task is to quickly waste energy and be thrown into the “dustbin of history.”

Mom, the person I dearly loved, did not at all discourage my attraction to women, and certainly did not make me hate girls. What are you - on the contrary, I’m only happy to say something nice to them, nicely congratulate them on the holiday, lend them a shoulder, support (the honest truth - I did so many times), carry heavy things for them, open doors, throw myself into the fire for the girls - I am them and I admire it. But - only for their own sake, so far it is beneficial only to one side. I will not allow myself to receive reciprocation. In my thoughts, figuratively, I placed Woman on a pedestal, like a goddess, to which I myself could no longer rise.”

The first step has already been taken
It seemed to us that this piercing message was a request for help, so we decided that we could not do without qualified advice from a psychologist, and turned to a young specialist who, in our opinion, would be able to better understand the young man.

The theory voiced was outlined by journalist Jeremy Lawrence on the pages of The Independent.

Kanatsawa bases his vision on well-known and fairly widespread theories, answering the question of why beautiful women are more likely to have daughters, the scientist cites the Trivers-Williard hypothesis, which states: if parents can pass on to their children traits that are more favorable for individuals of a certain sex, children of that sex will more will be born. Kanatsawa suggested that beautiful people more daughters, because from the point of view of evolution, the main advantage of a woman over her rivals is beauty, and I found statistics that confirm this.

Discussing the idea that liberals might supposedly be smarter than conservatives, Kanatsawa found evidence that the average IQ of young people who described themselves as extremely liberal was 106, while those who described themselves as extremely conservative had an average IQ of 95.

"Evolution encourages people to be conservatist, to care primarily about their family and friends. Liberalism and concern for the indefinite set strangers who are not genetically related to you is something innovative from an evolutionary point of view. Therefore, smart children are more likely to become liberals when they grow up,” the author of the article outlines Kanatsawa’s conclusions.

Kanatsawa explains the love of men for blondes by the fact that blonde hair- a sign of youth (they darken with age). He considers polygamy an integral feature of human nature: “If the wealth gap is large, it is better for a woman to share a rich man with someone than to lead a monogamous lifestyle with a poor man.”

Spouses who have sons rather than daughters are less likely to divorce, since sons need a father more: he guarantees that the offspring will inherit wealth and social status, Kanatsawa believes.

Kanatsawa explains the midlife crisis in men not by the aging of men, but by the fact that their wives are beyond reproductive age. The scientist considers sexual affairs of male politicians to be the norm: men strive for political power in order to attract more women. Sexual harassment that men subject women to at work is not discrimination against women, but only a particular manifestation of the behavior of men with potential competitors, Kanatsawa believes.

Let us recall that earlier Spanish scientists made a connection between communication with beautiful women and the release of the stress hormone cortisol in men. Its excess threatens diabetes, hypertension and even impotence, researchers warn.

After many years of working as a psychologist in a hospital, I suddenly (?) caught an idea: to analyze the issues of the gender of children in married couples. I never specifically asked myself why some people only give birth to boys, while others only give birth to girls. But there is a pattern, and I will try to show it! Please note that these are just my assumptions.

I came to the main conclusion that a woman is “given” a boy if, during the period of preparation for childbearing, during gestation and birth itself, she had problems, unclear life situations regarding masculinity. In other words: if a woman had difficulties communicating with men at that time (father, first love, husband, etc.). And then she gives birth to a boy, so that over time, step by step, she can again go through her life lessons in relationships with the male sex from the very beginning - from the birth of her son!

I can say the same about men: if there are difficulties in communicating with women (his wife), then he will definitely “get” the girl. In every woman, a man, whether he wants it or not, is “looking” for a mother. Many men even try to please their daughters, since daughters represent the feminine gender?!

But what about families with children of different sexes, you ask? I can make the assumption that the family is in a relatively harmonious relationship, so everything is equal!

I looked at couples who persistently wanted a baby of a certain gender, but received, for example, only girls!
I have had and still have to advise women from the North Caucasus, where this situation is more obvious. There are three or four girls in the family, but the man maniacally demands from his wife a boy - an heir! That poor woman suffers, sometimes even undergoes IVF, but still a girl is born. But a man needs to “change” his thoughts regarding Women in general, and then maybe he will have a chance!?

Story 1: Woman (42 years old) director of a real estate agency. At the age of 15, her father left the family, and for the girl it was a tragedy. She wanted to be a historian, but she entered medical school “to become a surgeon” in order to prove her father’s guilt (her father was a surgeon). I graduated from the institute, but I didn’t work for a day in my specialty, because the smell of iodine and the sight of blood bothered me! At the age of 20, she married a rich man, with whom she gave birth to two boys of the same age. Over time, her irrepressible energy made itself felt, and her husband bought her a real estate agency. But this does not stop her from constantly meddling in the lives of her men and controlling them for any reason!

Story 2: A man (50 years old), was married three times, and in all marriages he had boys. When he was undergoing psychoanalysis with me, we “pulled out” a recurring pattern: all of his wives had difficult relationships with their fathers. And they all tried to subjugate him and crush him under themselves. He is a very soft and compliant person. But, at the same time, very amorous and sociable, and most importantly, wealthy! And always - desirable for almost any woman!

Story 3: Woman (45 years old), married, two girls. The husband is a tyrant and usurper, works in the security forces. Completely “subjugated” his wife. Before that, he had a family with a daughter, whom he does not help financially. As a child, he experienced betrayal from his mother, and then from his first love - and therefore does not trust women, and transfers his unfulfillment in life and resentment to his daughters!

Such stories can be told endlessly, and I am sure that if you “rummage” through your memory, you will remember a lot of things!

There is a cool and common phrase: Whoever is born, do not drown him! All children are given to us by God, they must be loved and raised. What about the gender of the child? This is just a hint for the parent of the opposite sex. But the decision: whether you need to understand yourself is up to you.

APPEARANCE OF THE CHILD and GENDER OF THE CHILD February 4th, 2014

The mother can influence the appearance of the unborn child. The uterine fetus is a plastic substance, which the mother can give a beautiful or ugly form, or a resemblance to some person or persons, can leave an imprint on it or an image that was vividly present in her imagination during pregnancy. At a critical, emotionally charged moment, she can influence the sensitive surface of the uterine fetus, which can perceive this image. “Wealthy Greeks had the custom of installing beautiful statues near the bed of the expectant mother so that she would always have perfect images before her eyes.”

A child who wants to please his mother looks like his mother. A child who wants to please his father looks like his father. Whoever wants to please both parents inherits the most advantageous external features from both. He who wants to please himself does not resemble his parents at all.
He who likes originality is not like anyone else, he is original.

A child may look like his grandmother or grandfather, which means that while in the mother’s womb he wanted to please his grandmother or grandfather. This child was born thanks to the love of his grandmother or grandfather. This desire can change, and, according to it, a person can repeatedly change his similarity during his lifetime.

The external resemblance of a child to one of the adults is an expressed gratitude for the vital support provided by this person. The element of similarity is a sign of expression of love and appreciation.

Those who do not want to please their mother look like her in appearance, but have some flaw or congenital defect. If a protest against the mother arises after birth, then a defect also arises at the same time.

Whoever does not want to please his father, his resemblance to his father is disturbed by some flaw or deformation of the skeleton. Those who protest very strongly against parental illusions are born with anomalies of the facial part of the skull. This is how the child’s desire to be himself is fulfilled. This could also be a severe retribution for one’s own protest from a previous life. Cosmetic and surgical removal of defects is successful for those who release an internal protest against their parents.

A physical defect is always made up for by spiritual abilities, for everything in Nature is balanced

GENDER OF THE CHILD
A child is the fruit of joint creation. Genuine and harmonious creation occurs only through the Heart
“Parents who want a child prepare for its arrival in a completely different way than parents who need a child.”
The soul of an unborn child sees whether he is wanted or needed. She feels that a mother who waits for a child with love is able to wait for a child like that only if she loves the man who conceived this child. When the Soul sees how the father caresses the crib awaiting the child with his gaze, or expresses his love by testing the strength of the crib with his hand, then the child feels that he can also rely on the father. This father is expecting a child because he needs him.

The field structures of the unborn child are extremely negatively affected by rigid planning of his gender, the reluctance of one of the parents to have a daughter or son. Even doubts about the advisability of having a child at this particular time, not to mention trying to get rid of him, is the destruction of his destiny, happiness, health, communication structures and unity with people.

The genital organs of the embryo begin to form from the eighth week of pregnancy. How later to parents An obsessive idea comes to mind about the specific sex of the child, the better for him, the more developed his genitals will be, the less harm is done to their development.

If parents want a girl, but they have an obsession with having a boy, then the child is not born. If they need a girl and the girl is conceived, but they learn about the pregnancy and begin to desire only a boy, then the pregnancy may be terminated. Or a girl is born with the character of a boy

When parents deserve a son, but want a daughter, then a son is born who, as he grows up, becomes effeminate in both appearance and manners.

Once these parents find out the sex of the child, they are usually disappointed with the result. The greater the disappointment, the bigger baby will avoid parents. The realization that he is not loved for who he is alienates the child from his parents and pulls him into the company of those who will love him for who he is.

The birth of a child depends on the mother,

The sex of the child depends on the father.

A man who wants to prove his worth, i.e. wants to please himself, conceives a son.

The birth of a son is a proud moment for a father. An overly proud man often does not have sons. The less proud one is born, but if he begins to boast about his son, he may lose him.

Those whose self-esteem does not increase with the birth of a son will most likely continue to produce sons, despite the fact that their wife desperately desires a daughter.

A man who wants to please a woman begets a daughter.

A man who wants to prove his love to a woman conceives a daughter. If a woman also wants a man to prove his love to her, then the birth of a daughter is a done deal.
If the desire to please is equal in both, twins are born. The birth of twins speaks of a woman’s extreme desire to prove that she is a woman. If at the moment a man really wants to please a woman, girls will be born. If he wants to prove to himself that he is a man, sons will be born. If a man strongly desires to prove that he is an individual, both a son and a daughter will be born.

Children are not born:

A. When both parents want to please only themselves, when they have something to be ashamed of in each other. Such families are held together by work, business, money, fame, self-affirmation, which is more important to them than having a child.

B. When the desire to be liked has grown into reluctance
If this desire spills out in the form of noisy scandals and assault, they separate. If it is driven deeper for the sake of reputation, for the sake of existing children, they continue to live together, without feeling that life is dull and monotonous. In such spouses, the reluctance to please was born in childhood from parental conflicts. Children try to be liked by their parents, but parents take out everyday troubles on their children, and they lose all desire to be liked. The married couple subconsciously hopes that the child will change the situation, but the child cannot be born - hidden bad things are in the way.

Q. When parents try to please each other through a child, he is not born.

If a man acts at the moment as the woman wishes, then the woman favorably accepts the seed he offers, it fertilizes the egg, even if a child is not desired.
The fate of the fertilized egg depends on the relationship between the parents during the first week of pregnancy, when the oviduct carries the egg to the uterus. If something in a husband gives rise to hostility in a woman, if a protest arises in her: “I don’t want such a husband! I don’t need anything from him!”, then the fertilized egg remains in the oviduct, where it continues to develop. The fear of losing her husband feverishly attracts her husband and at the same time repels him. “I want this man” and at the same time “I don’t want this same bad man” leads to ectopic pregnancy. The more aggressive a woman’s anger is, the faster the oviduct ruptures, and she ends up on the operating table. The stronger the reluctance to forgive, the more serious the complications.

desire to have healthy child There is a fear of having a sick child. The stronger the fear, the more people attracts what it fears.

(Luule Viilma. “I forgive myself”)

Do dominant women give birth to sons?

We are apes. Of the five species of anthropoids, three are social. Moreover, in two of them (chimpanzees and gorillas), females leave their brood, and males remain where they were born. Among chimpanzees studied by Jane Goodall in Gombe Stream National Park in Tanzania, the sons of older females rise to the top of the hierarchy faster than the sons of young females. High-ranking female apes “should,” according to Trivers-Willard logic, give birth to more males, and low-ranking females to females (172).

People are not very polygamous, so the reward for big size men's bodies are small: large ones do not necessarily get more weight than women. But humans are a very social species, and our society is almost always stratified in one way or another. One of the main, universal attributes of high status in men, as well as in male chimpanzees, is high reproductive success. Whether you look at the wild Aborigines or the Victorian English, high-ranking men have more children than low-ranking men. Social status men are to a great extent inherited, or, more precisely, passed on to the descendant from the parent. Women, in general, are more likely to leave home when they get married. I'm not trying to suggest that their tendency to move into their husband's house after marriage is instinctive, right, inevitable, or any good, but I do want to point out how widespread it is. Cultures in which the opposite is true are rare. In general, our society, like others great apes is a patrilocal (i.e., female-exogamous) patriarchy, in which sons inherit the status of the father (or mother) to a greater extent than daughters. According to Trivers-Willard, high-ranking fathers and mothers benefit from raising sons, while low-ranking mothers benefit from raising daughters. Is this really so?

In short, no one knows. American presidents, European aristocrats, monarchs of all breeds and stripes and other elite social strata are more likely to have boys. In racist societies, oppressed races seem to be slightly more likely to have daughters. But this topic is too fragile, with a huge number of complicating factors. Therefore, such statistics could hardly be considered reliable. For example, if a family stops having children immediately after the birth of a son (which could well be practiced by those who are interested in continuing the dynasty), then more boys will be born than girls. There are still no reliable results on the equality of the sex ratio at birth. But there is one provocative study that demonstrates how much interesting things can be learned when anthropologists and sociologists take on this question (173).

Back in 1966, Valerie Grant, a psychologist at the University of Auckland in New Zealand, noticed that pregnant women who subsequently gave birth to boys were more emotionally independent and dominant than those who subsequently gave birth to girls. Grant, using a standard test that distinguishes between "dominant" and "submissive" personalities (whatever that means), tested personal characteristics 85 women in the first trimester of pregnancy. Those who gave birth later to girls scored 1.35 points on the dominance scale (from 0 to 6). And those who gave birth to sons - 2.26. Interestingly, Grant began this work in the 1960s - even before the Trivers-Willard theory was published. She told me, “I came up with this idea independently of any other research in any field. I had an idea about a mechanism that “does not want” to burden women with the responsibility for a child of the “wrong” sex” (174).

Her work is the only hint that, in humans, a mother's social rank influences the sex of her offspring in precisely the manner predicted by the Trivers–Willard–Symington theory. If this is not just an accident, then the question immediately arises: how do people manage to so easily unconsciously achieve what they have been striving to learn to do consciously for countless generations?