A truculent idea has stuck in my head for a few hours. Does America is making some hyper materialistic or rationally Cartesian beings who think only to capitalize on almost everything. The question is still worth to be asked. Does the woman who inherits happiness certainly shared in a relationship should pay the copyright to her male partner who initially had the audacity to start this relationship by dating using daring ingenious subterfuges? The vast majority of relationships of our time usually begin by men who decide to take the courage to face the partners of the opposite sex and necessarily this fact is the main cause of what comes next. Despite evolution of morals, sexual liberation and equality as claimed by women, men, are still those who sometimes dwell in their inner strength to convince women to get married with them. Although women will argue that a man can seduce a woman only when she wants to, and that a no, from the outset, sometimes means yes on arrival, at the end men are still those doing the bulk of the effort to start a relationship, sometimes ruining even their financial health to seduce their sweetheart. Of course there are cases where women have gone ahead to start a relationship and of course in that context they may well also claim the copyright of a relationship. Furthermore even in the case of simultaneous meeting on virtual networks or in real life there is always a partner who first took the lead.

If one can accept the idea of ​​copyright why and how these charges should be paid?

mutual respect in a relationship is not bad at all and of course keeping the flame as was the case during the early days of romance, and sometimes remind the male partner who sometimes tend to neglect his partner after a time, to take responsibility; since, if that day he was not to start his talkative number, nothing would had happened , even if in the other side having accepted to call back that number carries no fewer responsibilities entrusted to the companion conquered by acceptance, she (he)should feel bound by a moral contract. Ultimately if men usually initiate the early stage of relationships, passed the introductory purpose verbatim or not, a relationship is done and undone together, just as children that may result or the construction of a material heritage, including in the separate properties union where the other partner is not less usufructuary (enjoyment of material goods without owning them). Also, copyrights should be shared as guilt if the relationship fails. Even in case of marriage with a person who turns out to be wrong in the end, you are guilty to have agreed at the beginning to be with that person, who in the end turns out to be a bad choice, even if that guilt can be softened by the circumstances because human beings have the right to be wrong about a person other than themselves if they don’t even know sometimes who they are themselves.

​

By Hubert Marlin

Journalist -Writer