Beauty is only skin deep

In early July, when she came for an interview and I saw her in passing only, I thought they are about hire another manager. Having looked at her legs I said to myself I could work under her (in case anybody wondered what that post was inspired by).

She joined my team (i.e. the one I work in, not the one I am in charge of, for avoidance of doubt) in August as a junior analyst. As a next year’s graduate, she has some way to go before she becomes a self-supporting team member. By that time the workload she takes off other workmates is offset by more experienced employees’ time sacrificed to teach her. No wonder, this is called an investment in human capital. Nearly a decade ago some people, whom I am grateful today, have invested in me.

She had had an internship last year in another department, then had a break and returned to my team. She can boast to be in the first decile of best students of the same university I have graduated from, so the managers thought she is a very promising candidate.

In terms of background, I believe she is OK. Her energy and positive attitude resemble me at such age (i.e. in 2010) will keep her company for a while, then the ruthless corporation will suck it out of her. In terms of behaviour, from the first hours, she has been extremely bold, including asking people personal questions and openly flirting with me (after two weeks of attempts and being confronted with my humorous, yet firm retorts she has not completely given up on, yet reduced frequency of ambiguous chats).

What she is like? Tall, skinny, figure of a model, dyed blonde hear, tonnes of make-up on face (a thick layer of powder and vivid-red lipstick). Her behaviour is anything but natural not straightforward. She plays out roles all the time, every her word, movement, smile, look seems carefully planned.

Whether she’s beautiful? Either I can’t tell, because I have never seen her without make-up (somehow I don’t long for it) or just she does not square with my definition of a beautiful woman who is beautiful without make-up.

My female colleagues dislike her. Not because they envy her a model’s look, but since they see her duplicity and mistrust her. She is anything but trustworthy, so we all watch our words while she is around.

Male workmates at first salivated at her sight, after a month they make laugh of her. Quick change of mind boys in the office have exhibited lifts my spirit. We have all realised she is looking out for a new cash machine. She met her current boyfriend while having the aforementioned internship, therefore she could not return to her previous workplace. My capacity to become a cash machine are decent, yet my motivation is close to zero (I am considering the “money in exchange for sex” arrangement).

One evening I thought about printing out the motto of the fellow blogger: UNDERSTAND YOUR BIOLOGY. THEN RISE ABOVE. But on second thoughts I concluded this would be too provocative, through bright.

In the meantime our manager is committed to be her mentor and coach and spends lots of time teaching her (taking that undesired load off backs of team members). Sadly, folks around the floor have noticed it and his engrossment in taking care of the new employee is a topic of gossips and jokes in nooks and crannies of the office… To make it clear, I do not think he would go beyond professional framework of this relationship, but the very fact an attractive young girl sees him as seasoned manager boosts his ego.

Life’s a whore…

After one turns 30, when the ticking of the clock is more audible people tend to go into two extremes. Either they raise the bar too high and no potential partner can meet their exorbitant requirements or they lower their expectations overly and get involved into middling relationships. This reminds me of one sink-or-swim decision I should take…

#metoo

The sexual harassment scandals have first begun to come to the light in the film industry. The outrages were sparked off by situations some of which I believe provoked by young women intent on making quick careers. You could argue who should take moral responsibility for incidences of harassment speeding up career advancements. I believe it all boils down to sexuality of humans which cannot be muffled nor circumvented. Regardless of the guilt (although I lean towards blaming the “system”), the issue has become an issue of critical importance and another brick in the wall of political correctness. It has also spilled over corporations, many of which have put into effect schemes and code of practices (sometimes absurd and at the end of the day having the opposite effect) which prevent such situations.

A few months ago I had an online training on violence and sexual harassment at workplace. My female and male workmates have unanimously mocked at it, coming to a conclusion we have repeatedly been both victims and perpetrators of sexual harassment. Under the definition paying your workmate a compliment that their outfit suits them well already falls under sexual harassment. A proposal to go to kitchen to drink coffee together or to go together for a lunch out also might make you a criminal. Or let your workmate sue a corporation and wheedle out money.

My scepticism towards #metoo does not mean I embrace various forms of overstepping boundaries at work. I believe however some behaviours might be acceptable:

- obvious ones, as eating or drinking coffee together, travelling in a lift or sitting in a room without glass walls and other persons assisting you,

- ambiguous jokes or another form of humour not aimed at any specific person, albeit my good practice is to hold back from really bawdy jokes when women are around,

- soft flirting confined to paying compliments.

What is unacceptable then:

- any form deemed acceptable above if a specific person affected it has expressed their wish to cease it or finds it unacceptable,

- lewd humour aimed at specific person (although there are people, like me, who find it acceptable as long as everybody knows there are just jokes)

- explicit proposals,

- touching, groping and other forms of physical contact.

I also recommend an article from Financial Times which puts the matter in a well-balanced perspective.

Stringent rules and fear of being accused of harassment or assault have also the other side of the coin. They hamper starting up relationships (out of such fear) at workplace which at some age is the main opportunity to meet new people and spend more time with them (needless to say relationships on superior – subordinates line or between units where conflicts of interest may appear are not desirable). Unless you want to install Tinder… Yet the dating application offers the muck many of us, including me, do not fit in…

Tylko nie mów nikomu - film review

The yet another controversial film delving into depravities of the clergy premiered on 11 May. Unlike Kler which went to the silver screen (and has become the blockbuster immediately), Tylko nie mów nikomu is a documentary exploring the topic of paedophilia plaguing the Catholic Church in Poland and has been released on YouTube. An investment in a cinema ticket is hence unnecessary; a broadband Internet connection is fair enough to get to grips with the film in one’s place. The exact number of actual viewings in unknown, since Youtube counts in every playing longer than 30 seconds, however the approximate audience of 20 million is whopping.

The film is available free of charge since it has been… crowdfunded. Sekielski brothers had decided not to seek commercial sponsors to raise money for the controversial documentary, but had not problems soliciting donations from munificent private contributors.

Unlike several people who I have talked to, I have stuck it out till closing credits. Most of viewers I have talked to had to pause in the middle of watching since the content of the film was too heart wrenching. My tolerance to dirt is relatively high, but this film made me want to puke several times during the two-hour watch. The documentary leaves a mark or even a scar and poses questions rather than gives answers.

Firstly, hats down to victims who had the courage to tell stories of their trauma to the camera and to confront with the priests who had harassed them.

Secondly, the documentary reminds sexuality is a very delicate sphere of human psyche. It takes little to harm it and lasts years to recover from a trauma.

Thirdly, I cannot refrain from sharing the most shocking observation learnt from a film. Academically, most criminals whom we call paedophiles, are not genuine paedophiles. A genuine paedophile can reach sexual arousal only in contact with a child (an adult would not stimulate them). The overwhelming majority of criminals (including priests) convicted for sexual harassment of children do not meet such definition. They resort to sexual contacts with children, since the same activities with adults are, for some reason, out of their reach. This is the most appalling and disgusting, since I would not consider a girl (let alone a boy) aged let’s say 17 or less a sexual object. In other words, a girl below certain age (approximately 17 years) would not even stimulate me sexually. The most horrifying conclusion, not just after watching the film, but after conversations with workmates and friends is that the percentage of men who react like me appears to be smaller than I would expect…

In the public discourse, the film was dubbed as a part of all-out anti-church campaign. I would refute the accusation the film attacks the Church as an institution. It points at specific representatives of the clergy who are guilty of criminal deeds and highlights practices aimed at covering up incidences of paedophilia, sweeping it under the carpet, disregarding victims. It also plainly blows a deal to cult of the late Polish Pope whose shameful heritage in concealing paedophilia crimes is inexcusable.

The timing of film’s release somehow coincides with the home straight of the campaign before the European election. Striving to foresee the result of next Sunday’s vote in Poland, I bet the ruling party and the combined opposition who go neck in neck, will get similar outcome. Much will depend on the turnout and mobilisation of voters. I will visit the polling station around the opening hour, before heading for the sanatory. Deep down I hope a situation from 2015 presidential election when the one who was bound to win did not end up victoriously, repeats.

Customarily, for the period of being off for holidays, blogging is suspended, but in mid-June will be resumed with a coverage of the trip or with another allegedly noteworthy note.

“That’s what she said”, but is that what she meant?

Lucy (namely customarily changed)and I have known each other for some less than 4 years, I think. We met in the New Factory, around 3 years ago we tried to go out, i.e. went out to town a few times, got somewhat closer than holding hands, yet we both realised there was too little chemistry between us to pair up, yet enough to pal up. As adults do, none of us has taken umbrage and though she no longer works with the New Factory, we see each other a few times a year. Since the going-out attempt, I have found a girlfriend, she has found a boyfriend (we both got to know our second halves), I have broken up with the girlfriend, she and her boyfriend are still together.

Two weeks ago Lucy asked me on messenger how I was doing with decorating my flat and the progress of moving in. In response, I sent her some photos, she insisted I showed her the flat, rather than just pics. Recently I have embraced all forms of gate-crashing, so I suggested she came over on the same day.

Knowing our relationship was clear I expected she would pay me a visit, take a mini-tour through the dwelling, we would eat or drink something, have a chat and she would go away. She came with a bottle of wine, yet firmly insisted I did not open and keep it for a better occasion, in the meantime she called her boyfriend (who was spending the weekend at his father’s) and told him where she was, the visit followed the scenario I had outlined before.

On Easter Sunday my parents spotted the bottle of wine. I told a female friend of mine had dropped in on me and had brought it. They were convinced she had come with a clear intention and I had missed an opportunity. On Easter Monday when I went for a long walk with my father he told I should have shagged her, for pleasure. There was no reasoning with parents, but let’s leave this thread off.

The story illustrates not just the generation gap (my friends see the same disparity in perception of the same behaviours between their parents and them), but how times and acceptable behaviours have changed as well. What a few decades ago was a clear signal of interest (and for many a step too far), today is just a meaningless friendly visit and I am convinced (knowing Lucy for many years) if I had made a pass on her, I would have ended up slapped in face, she would have made off and the circle of my friends were have got narrower by one person.

I am far from commending the Islamic model in which a woman cannot talk to another man if her husband is not around, I am also far from condemning the current laxity of female-male relationships, yet the distinction between showing (a sexual) interest and being nice to a man has waned in recent years. When ambiguous jokes, despite #metoo, have become the order of the day, when being nice to a male friend has the same appearances, as picking a boy up, the importance of flirt, a sophisticated art of tightening a relationship into the romantic angle, has waned and I deplore about it. We, males, as straightforward human beings, happen to get lost in it and misread (in both ways) the signals sent to us by females.

Is the friendship between a woman and a heterosexual man possibl?. I argue, yes, as long as a man does not find his female friend sexually appealing. I have a few female friends, most of them are objective attractive, but I personally do not find them sexually attractive, which is absolutely normal, unlike willing to have sex with any creature of the opposite sex. This lack of sexual attraction ensures the relationship is safe and rules are clear for both parties.

As I concluded the conversation on the situation above with one of my female friends (10+ years since hitting it off without understatements), a male is a too straightforward creature to think up the concept of friendzone. Having gone through some ups and down in relationships and endavours to enter into them, I feel seasoned enough not to fall into the trap of the friendzone. If I am interested in a woman, I will not try to get closer to her by reaching the status of her trusted friend and getting stuck in that position while someone else will shag her (pardon the explicit language). In majority of situations such approach means I lose a woman (who wants me to be her friend, but not boyfriend) at all, which ensures I emotionally close such chapter, not caring whether it might hurt her, therefore the loss is preferable to a delusion.

Pokolenia Ikea - book review

Though the series of books by Piotr C., an anonymous (a coincidence?) writer has received some publicity a few years ago when they hit bookshops’ shelves, I somehow missed out on them. Then, in recent months, via links on fejsbuk I have run across the Pokolenie Ikea blog. Posts out there appear infrequently, yet when a note is posted you can be sure it will be lengthy, yet carefully-written, well-thought-out and will hit the nail in the head of the topic it cracks down on.

Reading of the blog has turned my attention into the series of books written by the same author, born in 1976, allegedly a lawyer in one of wicked offices of multinational corporations in Warsaw. So far I have read the first and shortest one “Pokolenie Ikea” and around one-third of “Pokolenie Ikea. Kobiety”. The third one, “Brud” is still ahead of me. The decision to get familiar with Mr Piotr C.’s literature was swift and spontaneous, so I came by books in pdf, but later on, as I shared my first impressions with one of my friends, it turned out she was in possession of paperbacks and keen to lend them to me.

My first impression after going through first chapters of the first book was that I was waddling in filth and that it must have been a mistake, since this could not have been written by the same guy who publishes sensible stuff on Pokolenie Ikea blog. Actually my impression was much shaped by lack of proper distance towards reality I had at the very moment of starting out to read. If you do not belong to the world depicted in the book, keeping your distance to characters and their misbehaviours is the only way to safely endure it from cover to cover.

I still wonder how many people’s everyday existences look akin to how characters of the book live like. How many corpo-workers instead of raising families sacrifice over 50 hours per week to toil away for their employers, get well-paid but spend all their money on partying, boozing, dating and focus their all attention on looking for opportunities to have an intercourse with a first-met chick in her mid-twenties. My friends and workmates do not live like this. They have families, their spouses and children are priorities for them, they claim to have never lived like this, even in their mid-twenties, let alone around the age of 35 as characters of Pokolenie Ikea. Then I took a broader look and found such people working somewhere at the New Factory. I had few chances to work on something in collaboration with them, yet enough to find out I would not like to have anything in common with them. With my rather orderly life, I feel a sort of contempt for people whose (hollow) lives revolve around corporate treadmill, wild partying, casual sex, drugs and alcohol. Apologies, I got the order wrong, their lives ooze with perverse sexual adventures, everything else is just an addition.

But all in all, taking the picture of crazy folks in their 30s with a pinch of salt, I have found the story amusing, though the broader picture is rather bitter. Looking at characters, you see immature men in their thirties who desperately try to avoid facing adultness and shun responsibility. On the other hand you see women either sex-starved and resembling four female individuals from “Sex and the City” or desperately trying to latch into a guy having all makings of an ideal husband and father before their biological clock tells them it is too late.

Had it not been for the fact the author has claimed to be one of such kidults, I would have pointed out the whole series had been intended to ridicule the immature generation who cannot see further then the ends of their noses. But had it not been for the fact I have shared with you some episodes from my life I cannot be entirely proud of, I might interpret the book as a catharsis, an attempt to make up for all silly deeds, a penance consisting in guiding others not to take that path.

Conceivably I am scratching beneath the surface and struggling to find something beyond the straightforward purport of the books. Conceivably in vain, yet despite occasional disdain, I will make it to the end cover of the last, just to satisfy my curiosity.

Sztuka Kochania - book review

I reached out for the book, after watching the film biography of its author. The cult Polish “manual” of human sexuality has had several editions, I have come by the most recent one, with up-to-date preface and supplemented with a chapter on contemporary contraception methods.

Some chapters of the book were edited or complemented by Mrs Wisłocka over her lifetime, as she worked on consecutive, improved editions, but all in all it can be felt Sztuka Kochania was written 40 years ago. The three central characteristics that prove how the world has moved on during the last four decades are:

1) the emergence and advance of Internet, taking place of papers and video cassettes as a source of skewed knowledge of sex and carrier of pornographic content,

2) the demise of taboos; sex-related stuff has become a topic of shame-free conversations within families and among friends,

3) fading traditional roles ascribed to specific sexes, in terms of behaviours, sharing duties and responsibilities (this has given rise to research on gender identity).

Since 1970 a huge stride in terms of culture of sex life and its understanding has been made, nevertheless progress has not rendered the book useless.

Socially, awareness of sexuality has improved, shame no longer accompanies deliberations on it, yet much still needs to be done. The main channels through which youngsters gain education are the Web and other easily accessible media. Needless to say contents young people familiarise with are far from professional substantive education they should receive at school and at homes (if parents are prepared and not to afraid to pass such knowledge).

Scientifically, biggest step forward has been made in contraception. Today, withdrawal method is widely criticised because of its high failure rate (not to mention practical aspects), while 40 years ago was a generally accepted contraception method. In 1970s contraceptive pills, nascent and imperfect, were believed to cause detrimental side effects to women’s bodies, while today, though gynaecologists remain aware of the pills’ shortcomings, they are recognised as practical and effective birth control method.

There are passages in the book I have mixed feelings about. The author several times stresses it is not a coincidence woman is female, while man is male. A woman’s role is to give birth, a man’s role to initiate mating rituals. While we cannot and I believe should not play with biology, decisions who wears pants in a relationship, how responsibilities are shared and who takes matters into their hands should belong to a couple. As I observe marriages and non-formalised long-term relationships, they function as partnerships with large degree of autonomy and commonly shared responsibility for household duties and bringing up offspring.

Mrs Wisłocka dedicates part of a chapter of contraception to abortion, permitted before 1989 in Poland. She decidedly underlines pregnancy termination is evil and ought to be avoided (therefore she advocates access to birth control), however claims the decision whether to have it performed it should be left to a woman only and a would-be father has nothing to say. While I know a man will not spend nine months pregnant and may make away leaving a woman and an infant out in the cold, if he stays by her side, he should be allowed to have his say (unless he brutally forces a woman to terminate pregnancy).

When the book was first published, youngsters began to live together under one roof usually after getting married. In the twenty-first century mass migration from provincial areas to large cities, availability of rented dwellings and mortgages and social changes accelerated the moment a youngster flies the nest. This translates into earlier start of learning the life together – couples begin to live under one roof well before tying the knot (if at all) and earlier begin to discover each other.

The purport of Sztuka kochania which remains always up-to-date is that relationships should be based on empathy and mutual respect, no matter if in bed, in running a house, raising children or elsewhere. This universal credo should be instilled at home and odds to shape an adult who has not been taught empathy and respect at home are tiny, yet it is never too late to make efforts.

Those who expect a guide or an instruction how to make love, should not waste time going through the book, though it contains several priceless hints what to pay attention to. I believe Sztuka Kochania is worthwhile, as it enriches one’s grasp of sexuality, particularly how it is embedded in emotionality and how it intertwines with other spheres of human life. A driver who skilfully operates a vehicle and whose passengers enjoy a safe and comfortable ride, must not necessarily be familiar with how engine, transmission and other parts of vehicle work, though they gently but firmly steer a vehicle. It would never hurt, however, if they improved their grasp of mechanics ;-)

Sztuka Kochania. Historia Michaliny Wislockiej - film review

As I saw the trailer of the moving-picture biography of Michalina Wisłocka and learnt the film was shot and produced by the same crew who were behind absolutely magnificent Bogowie, I knew I had to watch the film portrait of a woman who in the 1970s became for Poles the same who Alfred Kinsey became for Americans over 20 years earlier.

The life story of Mrs Wisłocka which emerges from the film is somewhat heart-wrenching and somewhat sordid. The person who taught Poles to discover their sexuality in her twenties lived in a self-arranged threesome, the as she, her husband and their (female) friend / lover broke up, in her mid-thirties fell in love and had an affair with a married man to finally end up as a single mature woman. I do not mean such life experience could disqualify hrt as an sex therapist, yet depicts how complicated life is and how important it is to separate one’s own painful tribulations from an objective look on relationships between women and men. If Mrs Wisłocka was denied the right to teach people how to love, why priests, who by definition should live in celibacy and abstain from sexual activity, would be allowed to instruct people how to raise families and shape love life?

In terms of being a work of art, I found the movie gripping, yet not as splendid as Bogowie. For part of the audience some moments might be found disgusting, since scenes of copulation are exposed naturalistically and probably the short length and hiding sexual organs are the only reasons why they do not fall under the definition of pornography.

As I understand it, the intent of the film is twofold – to bring closer to audience the profile of Mrs Wisłocka and, predominantly, to break the still-existent taboo of speaking openly of sex life. Mrs Wisłocka deserves credit for raising awareness of sexuality, extending access to education on the topic and fighting prudishness, avidly nurtured by both the catholic church and the communist party.

Sexual needs are, as Mrs Wisłocka pointed out over her whole life, one of basic (closer to the bottom than in Maslow’s hierarchy of needs) needs of a human and need to be met. This assertion does not imply one should strive to make unfettered indulgence in all desires, but to combine love and making love, the emotional and the physical realms of love, which only brought together bring true self-fulfilment. If the classic sentence: I am human, and nothing of that which is human is alien to me, holds true, why should we be ashamed of what is human?

If the shame creeps in, this is just because inhibitions have been instilled in us in the process of upbringing, which should definitely be balanced – neither promoting dissipation (we are human therefore we should not copulate like animals) nor confining sexuality a tool of reproduction only married people are allowed to use.

Wisdom Mrs Wisłocka wanted to pass on to ordinary people has not evolved much over decades, as some concepts are everlasting:

- making love should not be associated with fear nor pain (leave out S&M now),

- there is no evil in drawing pleasure from sex, but equally important is to strive for your partner’s (especially woman’s) pleasure, give them respect and know limits they have set,

- sex life involves responsibility for your partner and yourself and realising consequences it may have,

- sexuality is an embodiment of love as an emotion and ought not to be boiled down to coarse lusts; only embedding in emotionality can guarantee fulfilment in sex life.

And at the end of the day, youngsters starting the sex life should bear in mind one universal sentence: Whatever you do, do prudently and mind the outcome.

The next step, which actually I should have taken before watching the film, is coming by the book by Mrs Wisłocka and reading it from cover to cover. Shame on me, I will be catching up with some overdue education and thus remind myself the value of lifelong learning in every realm of life.