Why? Because, they in substance say, “to think the experiment in love is one of the only forms of possible resistance to the ambient nihilism, which, with the fading of the sex act reduced to morbid libertinage, found its weapon of massive destruction”.
Heavy task. Philosophy, éprise of reason, are wary like plague of the love, synonymous with disorder, chaos and feelings unverifiable. To that, they say, it is necessary to add another handicap: “Philosophy is very male. One thus hears the story of only one half of humanity. The anxiety vis-a-vis the female one is already sharp in the common male of the mortals. It becomes exponential among philosophers, beings intransigent by nature. ” They solved, up to now, the problem with the same intransigence: the men reign on the spirit, the women give birth to To traverse the philosophical Pantheon of Aude Lancelin and Marie Lemonnier leads very quickly to this conclusion: the philosophers do not have many lessons to give us. Honour to whom honour is due, let us start with Plato (427-348 av. J. – C.), author of the myth following founder: in the beginning, the man was a sphere, that facetious Zeus judged good to cross into two; since, we all over the world seek our missing half, which undoubtedly awaits us some share. In practice, for Plato and his comrades of the Banquet, the physical love is the best means to reach the divine one. However among Greek thinkers, it is necessary, that point to reach, pass by (on) the body of young people and beautiful beautiful young men, to in no case by the female one, dedicated with the commonplace reproduction.

They are insane, the Romans? Not as much as that: let us observe Lucrèce (v. 98-55 av. J. – C.). For him, there is nothing to await love, if not the certainty “to miss the “ataraxie”, this calm sovereign, this wild independence”, this absence of disorder, in short all qualities who make the good life preached by ancient wisdom. Safety, according to Lucrèce, vis-a-vis the irrepressible requirements of the flesh? A free and plural sexuality, which is not encumbered sirupeux feelings. After all, he would not have repudiated Marc Aurèle (121-180) who considered that the coitus is never but “one friction of belly with ejaculation in a spasm of sticky liquid”…

The concept of viscous dégouliné until XVIe century, in particular at Montaigne (1533-1592), which adored to preserve in its moustache, a long time after the love, “the odor of the sticky kisses”. Skeptic, the author of the Tests is without illusion on the love, for him, limited to “an waked up, sharp and merry agitation”. He makes fun of the prudes, “those which go there only from one buttock”, but made proof, thing extremely rare at his time, of consideration for the female one, which he places on an equal footing, and not only with regard to the sex. “It does not have anything generous, writes he, that which can receive pleasure where it does not give any. ”

Not this generosity in Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778), apostle of the equality of all in front of the law, but certainly not between the sexes. Father of the romanticism, his sexual immaturity is legendary. He called his great love, Mrs. de Warens, “mom” (considering her age, she could the being). He finally lived with a woman whom he did not love, of which he had five children, that he all gave up. What did not prevent it from writing admirable texts on the love and Emile, a treaty on the education of the children of an admirable coherence – theoretical.

To rationalize for less suffering
One cannot, on the other hand, reproach Kant (1724-1804), the author of the Bases of the metaphysics of manners, to miss coherence. Its life is with the image of its work: désincarnée. It derogated forever from its currency “always Acted in such a way that the maxim of your action can be set up in universal law. ” What to remain untouchable and intouché.

To remain in the cold, a word of the Dane Sören Kierkegaard (1813-1855). The love occupies a central place in the work of the author of the Newspaper of the seducer. So central that, to preserve this jewel in all its purity, it is absolutely necessary to avoid consuming it. The lovers will meet of as much better in eternity than they were not linked in reality…

Nietzsche (1844-1900) finally gives to the love the beautiful role, that of absolute generator of any creativity. Even if, in the facts, its love life were a disaster. That which did not await fifteen minutes to require – in vain – the hand of the first come young girl, suffered from a passion badly rewarded for beautiful Lou Andréas-Salome, egery of Freud and the Rilke poet. He lived under the cut of Elisabeth, his infernal sister, who diverted her thought with the profit of the Nazis…

Fortunately, the couples are not absent from history of philosophy: Hannah Arendt (1906-1975), the greatest passion of Martin Heidegger, his “beat of wing of Eros”, known as: “Is the love initially the power of the life? ; we belong to alive owing to the fact that we are under the orders of this power. That which undergone this power forever did not see, it does not form part of the alive ones. ”

As for Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1980), not very scrupulous seducer, one can take it in red-handed romanticism in the Being and Nothing. It described the love there as a form of subtle capture. One really loves neither a slave nor a too autonomous being. There is a balance to find, always unstable, always to reinvent. The base of the joy of love, adds the accomplice of the “arranged young girl”, it is to feel justified to exist.

Does the trade of the philosophers have a utility in our adventure in love? For Marie Lemonnier: “Between the catch of distance with respect to its affects with the risk to desiccate them and liming passion, there is a balance to find. ” For Aude Lancelin, smiling: “Until now, the rationalization did not preserve us torments of passion! ” Both are nevertheless of agreement. “The love is a war, one can die about it: for this combat, philosophy is a secret weapon…”

Cleavage female-masculine perdure. Those which live an unslung sexuality remain “bitches”, the men are always gift Juan. We say it less, because we want to be modern, but felt did not change. Women – themselves adhere to the idea of a “model good” of female sexuality. If it is not in practice, at least in the speech. Of course, they speak more than front, but undoubtedly would like to say some even more…

All the investigations show a bringing together of the men and women in their sexual practices during the last decades. In the long term, we could thus see emerging a perfectly similar sexuality, with as many phantasms for the ones as for the others, even of the similar phantasms. These differences are not indépassables by nature. But culturally, if. The company needs sexuées standards? ; the otherness, it is the base even of the heterosexuality. True progress would however be there: to release themselves from these single models, and to be able to enjoy its sexuality in all autonomy. ”

Tobacco: nicotine causes the tightening of the blood-vessels and decreases the surge of blood towards the penis, which ends up disturbing erection.
Alcohol: with moderation if not it is the quasi assured breakdown! Small glass that désinhibe and can help at the beginning. But an excessive chronic consumption ends up having frightening effects: lower testosterone rate (the hormone of virility), loss of the control of erection.
The drug taking (haschich, cocaine): in addition to being illegal, it can harm your sexual performances.
To make

Keep the line and supervise your food
- The overweight can be accompanied by problems of blood circulation and a fall by your rate by testosterone which, in the long term, will have an influence on your capacity to have erections. Several studies thus showed that one IMC (index of body mass) higher than 28,7 increases by 30% the risk of impotence.

- Attention with your cholesterol: privilege the good fat contents (fish, olive oils, nut, colza) and flee saturated greases which increase bad cholesterol (fatty meat, pork-butchery, produced with full-cream milk, egg) and stop the arteries.

Exercise
- It supports the production of endorphin, the hormone of the pleasure and the wellbeing.
- It helps to reduce the excess of weight.
- It release and drives out the stress.
- It improves your cardiovascular system and your blood circulation.
Made for example 30 minutes of swimming, fast walk or race on foot per day.
You are bitten of bicycle? To facilitate blood circulation in your genitals, regulate your saddle well: neither too high, nor too low. Ideally, your legs must always be folded even at the point low of the pedals.

Good with knowing
- The morning, your virility is with the signal: after a good night of sleep, the testosterone rate is with its maximum, which should facilitate the things.
- Spice your reports/ratios: the routine, the humdrum routine, in short the trouble, can prevent erection. Vary the positions, are inventive.

Insinuation: “I prefer speech. ” As if the punishment were an insult with the intelligence of the child… However, Claude Halmos, the punishment recalls, when it is not humiliating and that it is proportional to the fault, is neither an educational “under-tool” nor a form of ill-treatment. “It is essential. The interdict must be learned with the child. If it transgresses it first once, a call to order can be enough. On the other hand, if it continues to transgress, the sanction is essential – each relative having to invent the punishment which seems to him best adapted to the child and the gravity of the transgression. How the child could include/understand the importance of a rule if a punishment does not sanction its transgression? ” It is more than prejudicial, for him and the company, than it grows with the false idea and dangerous that it can badly act as any impunity. Without counting that the relative who speaks instead of sanctioning ends up losing any credibility with the eyes of his child. The punishment is also used to make respect the words of the parents, it gives them weight and direction, and prevents that they are not transformed into inoffensive blah.

“I am afraid of the conflicts”

The family life must proceed in good mood and serenity… The phantasm tempting, and is largely shared, but unrealizable. The conflict is inevitable because the child always opposes the limits, at least initially, and that the confrontation is structuring for him, although he is consumer of energy for the parents. A small child is not civilized: he is dominated by his impulses, the “pleasure principle” and the absolute power; so that it becomes it, it must change its initial operation. And, for that, the authority of his/her parents is essential for him. A child builds himself while being opposed. These divergences inevitably create frictions. For the psychoanalyst, to assume them, without seeking to preserve the peace of the moment, it is quite simply to make its duty of teacher. ?

As soon as the idylle is specified, together, we will decode the signs proving that the man is quite in love… And if it is shown too little impassioned, we will test, such of the detectives, to seize which traumatism or which unhappy childhood made it unable to be let go and to engage. Because if this history does not go, it is inevitably that the prince charming is a large neurotic terrified by the female desire.

The interior small films have this magic capacity: we write the scenario which is appropriate to us, that which protects best our image and our regard from ourself. The pessimists are made black films – “That will never walk, it is sure, and then I am certain that it has a girlfriend”, etc – but an sun ray is enough to rewrite a scenario more smiling…

Behind a questioning as apparently romantic as: “You believe that I can call it? You believe that I can show him my feelings? You believe that I can propose a restaurant to him? ”, a second, unconscious hides some: “Does my desire for this man shock you? Do you think that I have the right to sleep with him? ”

The men, them, never pose the problem of the legitimacy of their desire. Culturally, they are authorized, and even encouraged, to show itself wishing. However, they also have their side shopgirl, ensures Nicolas Guéguen, professor of social and cognitive psychology (lireplus low): “But the great difference is that a man does not spend the hours to the telephone with his best buddy to try to decode each word left the mouth its dulcinée, observes it. And it does not call it either in middle of the night to announce to him that it has just fallen on the ideal woman whom it hoped for since always. It waits the following day and says rather: “It is frankly exciting.” ”