Maybe writing an article about the dark and twisted romances on Substack could be a good idea. After all, they are a form of negative programming, especially if young people, like teenagers or even children, are reading them. I'm scared to think about what these kinds of books are doing to them and how they will affect them in the future. Are they going to be able to have a normal relationship or family?
Right now, I'm engaged in reading A. Lobaczewski; he highlights the role of "schizoids," when a society is generally morally weak, and who find in this a way to attract greater attention than in other times.
A. Lobazewski groups schizoidism into a kind of complex that includes other types of pathologies, often present in DNA. He often refers to all of these as "pathological factors."
When I read books, I often sense that a "pathological factor" is present; sometimes it's schizoidism, which manifests itself in "a basic pejorative view of humanity". Like a layer. Schizoidism seems to be very popular with people because it provides them with a model for why the world is harsh. In my town in Switzerland, there are specific neighborhoods full of schizoids. They have made it their trademark, people admire them because they think that they have "understood something about the world"; they believe themselves to be superior to others, only because they say things that are a bit harsh to humans. According to them, man is inherently fallible, weak - and "you shouldn't be a softie." From there to becoming a ruthless banker, there is only one step. I see that there is a pathological foundation, at the origin of what has become "a worldview."
I mean, there are certainly many characters in books who are schizoid. The policeman, worn out and jaded by crimes, the homeless man who wanders and can't find his place, etc. People worn out by existence and who are pessimistic about humanity. If the author doesn't consciously distinguish this worldview from the fact that it's pathological - and if the reader doesn't do the same - it risks reinforcing the idea of a bad nature of humanity, of our neighbor, which is fundamentally false and constitutes a bad way of approaching reality.
When you're interested in psychopathology, you can sometimes identify flaws in authors, whereas normally you would consider their text original, eccentric, etc. I'm paraphrasing A. Lobaczewski when I say this, but I'm increasingly able to see this.
I see that authors sometimes tend to convey deviant worldviews, sometimes in spite of themselves. But the result is content that is damaging to the mind; often it erodes an already existing layer of bad habits. Cheating on a person, etc, for example. I gave up on post-WWII literature a long time ago. The conversations between the protagonists no longer have all the "British" courtesy, and I encounter enough of this illiteracy on the street. So, language, too.
When I was little, I read Stephen King, for the scary dimension, etc. I'm convinced this is pathological content.
I think it's good that you promoted romance books, because it puts the mind back in its place. Reading about normal, natural relationships between people feels good. Thank you!
