For this final instalment, Patrick Laure turns to cinema, myth and religion to explore one fundamental question: who truly holds the power over life, procreation and destiny in a world still shaped by male dogma..?
The excellent film Children of Men, directed by Alfonso Cuarón and adapted from the novel by P.D. James, tells the story of a world where women no longer give birth.
There is no virus or pandemic; it is an anxiety-inducing extinction of humanity caused by the attitude of men, which, according to the Darwinian principle of species reproduction, means that women no longer want or are unable to bear children, because the world that men offer them is so diametrically opposed to their love of life.
Agreeing with Elon Musk in applying the First Principles, rather than reasoning by analogy, I cannot help but think of Alzheimer’s disease. Could this disconnection of the elderly be linked to a form of protection against the utter nonsense that the world offers to their existence, which is largely behind them?
“Catholicism would be a condition of eligibility within the National Council, which is frightening.”
Frightening is the word; “it’s scary” or “it’s nonsense” are phrases sadly all too often uttered by young people.
There is nothing more horrible than Dracula, but there is also nothing more beautiful, more charming, if not more charismatic. The only extraordinary human monster ever portrayed by all filmmakers. Why? Because he is romantic and loves women who love him back.
Neither Frankenstein nor the Werewolf of London or Navarre will ever be as endlessly portrayed as this extraordinary monster, offered to the cinema of our lives.
Frankenstein is pitiful, which does nothing to reassure a woman in her choice of a father for her children, while the werewolf tears off heads with his teeth, which is no more reassuring in the choice of a father.
Women know this better than anyone; they are the ones who choose, even if, paradoxically, it is physiologically women who offer themselves, receive, while men give.
Convex, concave, seems to be a supremacy of men over women, also allowing them to say no to abortion, as if ultimately women, who receive because men give, had no say in the matter, yet it is women who give life, essentially.
Thus, indisputably, women are the source of life, and in this respect, it is they who ultimately choose, whether men, simple men or ordinary monsters, like it or not.
The current debate on women wearing the veil brings us back once again to the misogynistic position of men, whether Islamists, Christians or Buddhists, it matters little, nothing escapes a macho view of the relationship between men and women.
Everyone will see or suffer the indoctrination they have been subjected to. For example, in a comparative religious context, in Judeo-Christian culture, women wear the veil in three circumstances.
When she enters the church to get married, on her father’s arm, she prepares to offer herself, promised, under her veil to be unveiled before her future husband.
When she becomes a widow, still entering the church, accompanying the remains of her late husband, she wears a veil, that of the bride who has lost the love of her life, thus renouncing the love of another, and for some, never revealing herself again.
When she entered the convent, because she had decided to offer her one and only love as a woman to God.
In Muslim culture, wearing the veil is a sign of pre-programmed belonging to one man for life, and must therefore be hidden from all other men on earth.
Even if Odon Vallet qualifies this by saying, “The veil worn by women is no more Islamic than the Basque beret is Catholic. But the Koran has sanctified a Near Eastern dress code that it has spread throughout the world.” (Petit lexique des idées fausses sur les religions – Odon Vallet).
This is to say that it is all very complicated, and to keep things simple, religions should stay out of the subject of abortion. So let us draw a veil over religions when it comes to human will, free will, the desire to be, or respect for one’s private life.
Because women know that Dracula will not know what to do with the veil that hides his bride’s neck. Better still, in this intimacy of heart and body, the woman will feel Dracula’s sensual gaze, which will pierce the veil of her hidden neck, which he cannot see, with his love, to drink in her love. It is so much more beautiful, sensual, bordering on an eroticism that cannot be discussed in national assemblies or law-making parliaments.
Therefore, there should be no discussion: the right to procreate belongs only to the one who holds it, namely the woman, according to her will in the face of the representation of the world and the artistic representation of her origin, under the brush of Gustave Courbet.
Simone Veil led this noble fight. She was a woman, of course, but that does not mean that many men followed her. This union was based on the right of everyone to control their own destiny, an indisputable fundamental right. This is obvious to any human being who cultivates both their physical and intellectual hygiene.
What choices are available to women? To be a mother or not, to accept oneself or not, to be independent, to embrace one’s destiny rather than a role? Men do not ask themselves these questions because, in reality, they frighten them.
Imagine a man who learns that his ‘regular’, sometimes his mistress, tells him, ‘I want your child‘.
In Quentin Tarantino’s first film, “True Romance”, a young man falls in love with a prostitute who was given to him as a birthday present by one of his friends. He says “yes” to his lover when she tells him, “I want your baby”, but this is cinema.
As a general rule, women, whether goddesses, mistresses, wives, servants of God or prostitutes, bring nothing to men other than what they lack, which the latter are well aware of.
In this void to be filled, the act of procreation, of creation, has no place other than that which the woman has decided, and that is how it should be.
And if, through love or accident, a creation is underway, the woman is free to decide what to do next, for we must guard against imposing dogmas or destructive behaviours on ourselves.
All we need to do is close our eyes, smell, and even more so, with this incredible hypertrophy of the senses that remain blind, feel the scent of a woman.
In the sweet scent of a Proustian madeleine, I realise with enchantment that if I did not love women, I would be a priest in Bogota.
Patrick LAURE
Secrétaire Particulier
+33 6 35 45 27 02
laurepatrick@wanadoo.fr
**The information provided in this article is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. It is not intended to create an attorney-client relationship. Laws and regulations vary by jurisdiction and may change over time. Readers should consult a qualified legal professional for advice specific to their situation. The author and publisher are not responsible for any actions taken based on this information.