I watch the Marry the Farmer reality show, and as a sexual-relationship counsellor, I have my opinions on it. It is a depressing, yet authentic portrayal of today's reality.
Take Jasmine, one of the winning women. When analysing what helped her to win, I see everything but pure fair play. Much like in life. How did the most modest-looking contestant beat her rivals from the saddle? By constant berating, quasi-whore-slapping, dipping the other, and then feigning remorse with an intimate confession that gave the girls left inside the mercy kicks.
Note his tactics: as soon as he arrived, he started drilling Tina. Tina never hurt Jasmine, yet Jasmine was always picking on her. What was Tina's crime? That she was prettier. True, the other two contestants are prettier than Jasmine, but Tina is also a powerful sexual presence, a confident, mature woman who is aware of herself, of her own good and bad qualities, and therefore more attractive than the others. So she had to be hurt. Tina and Zoli's farmer kiss, and Jasmine is outraged and declares that her kissing opponent has no class. From there it was only a step to whore the other woman. And here's the twist: Jasmine may well be in bed with the host at the first opportunity in the next broadcast. Oops! How interesting! Is it possible that those who condemn others for their sexual promiscuity are in fact the biggest bunnies in the alamus, jumping as soon as they have somewhere to jump? And here it's a matter of "having somewhere to jump", someone to be tempted by because someone chooses them as a partner. But if no one ever chooses them or only someone who is easy to resist? Can those who abstain for a lifetime be considered sexually chaste if they never had the opportunity to get into bed too quickly or have an affair? In other words, can a man who does not want a dog and therefore never has sexual temptation be considered virtuous?
Tina realizes that she doesn't want Zoli to be her master, so she stands up to him, boldly tells him to his face what she doesn't like and goes home. The cast has never been so self-conscious before in other reality shows: almost no one has ever walked out during the show. The pride and self-consciousness of women is growing, and it shows in real life: they no longer fight for the favours of just any man and put up with just any. The changed attitude of today's women towards men is demonstrated by the reaction of the other two contestants, Zsófi and Nóri, when Jasmine - also cleverly tactically, pretending sincere regret - tells them that she has already slept with Zoli. Both women freak out and lose interest in Zoli the farmer. Zoli assesses the changed situation and finally chooses Jasmine.
What does the viewer get from all this? And what does the person with whom all this happens in real life, when several people compete for the favour of one man or one woman? The conclusion is that evil wins. The triumph of evil. Justice is gone. And while mate selection is subjective, often not truth-based, it is also observed in other, more objectively measurable areas, such as a promotion, that you are often evaluated not on merit, but on who is the most skilful trampler and stomper, what you can say in the boss's ear. From such a negative experience or even a series of failures, the individual may conclude that "it's not worth being a good girl/ good boy" "you have to be rubbish" "I have to trample on the other person to get chosen". This is what I call a false connection.
The theory of false switching
I also call it a false association, a false association, a false conflation. My clients and readers of my book are already familiar with this theory. The idea is that there is a trauma, a failure, a negative experience in the past that is true and real. In this case, the viewer may think so:
- "Zoli chose Jasmine". It's true. But in such cases, one does not stop, but continues to analyse the situation:
- "He chose Jasmine because he had discredited Tina (l.dictaphone incident)." This is not quite true, the analysis is slipping here. This is where one usually does not stop, and ends up like this:
- "Consequently, you have to be rude, sneaky and drill the other person, that's the only way to prevail." Well, that's the wrong switch. When we go from an initial correct statement to a false conclusion because we logically connect in our minds two facts that are in many other cases independent of each other.
I just gave you an unintentionally evil recipe for knocking rivals out of the saddle. But consider one thing: a man who wants a woman like Jasmine is probably vibrating at that level himself. It turns out that Farmer Zoli is not fair either: he tells Zsófi and Nóri one thing about the case (good that you found out) and another to Jasmine (why did you tell them?). So the lesson is: don't be sorry if you don't get along with someone, you probably didn't have the same values. And the value trend cannot be changed. Everything else can.
And this is my answer to the many desperate a good girl and a good boy to a question that often comes up in my consultations, namely. why the good ones are not needed: yes, we do. Supply and demand just don't always match. Hang in there, stay good, stay honest and find each other! It's not true that people of good will don't need the opposite sex! Huge misconception! Next time, instead of being bitter, start with someone whose values you have observed: and only get involved if you find it matches yours.
(It is not known for sure whether this reality is based on a pre-written script. If it is even partially, kudos to RTL Klub! There are serious moral lessons to be learned from this season as well.) Continue below, if you liked it, hit like or comment on my forum legyenjobbaszex.hu/forum and then I will check out the other owners.
