March 8 suddenly turned into a natural disaster. For the last 15 years, this holiday has been systematically mocked by feminists and journalists from fashion publications, calling it “gender-based” and saying that women can buy their own mimosas and do not need a gala breakfast once a year. In the offices, of course, they celebrated, collected money for gifts – they did not break with traditions, but this holiday did not have much elegance. On the contrary, it has become customary to call it a holiday at work, an extra day off, in such a sarcastic tone. The main thing to emphasize for opponents of the holiday is the entire Soviet legacy! There is no longer communism or the memory of the two revolutionary women who created this holiday, so it can slowly be written off as scrap.
All these 15 years, while feminists and liberal public opinion tried to discredit the holiday, marketing tried to make money from it. And somehow, gradually, the gift for March 8 ceased to be a trifle – a cute souvenir or postcard – and somehow gradually fell into the category of “an important and meaningful gift”.
But since the beginning of SVO, even stranger things have started to happen at “gender holidays.” Both holidays were structured by the uncontrolled will of the people. Thus, February 23 returned to the “basic environments” and truly became Defender of the Fatherland Day, and March 8 is now an admirable day for women. And on this holiday there was some kind of system failure.
This year, International Women’s Day has become the most important day to show love to women. The guys demonstrated this with all their might and somewhere even went too far in this regard.
A few days before the holiday in the Kemerovo region, a man brought a live horse to the fifth floor to ride a white horse to his lover’s house. There was a stampede in a cosmetics store in Novosibirsk and some people were injured. A KamAZ truck loaded with tulips was robbed in Moscow and flowers worth 3 million rubles were stolen.
Besides. All the best restaurants in Moscow were booked for three days off. On the eve of the holiday, there are collapses and traffic jams on the streets. On the morning of March 8, at the Riga market in Moscow (the main point of flower sales), queues for kilometers formed, people fought and bought flowers at five or six times the price. Stas Mikhailov sang for women in the underground passage of the metro, creating another traffic jam after learning that men were in a hurry to take their loved ones there. A video of a buyer threatening a flower seller with a gun for packing the bouquet too slowly has gone viral. In social networks there is a Stakhanov competition in the nomination “best husband, boyfriend, lover”. And if someone does not have a loved one, then in Moscow at some metro stations there were “patrols” who gave tulips and sweets to women. A total of 25 thousand flowers were donated. The tension level is simply ugly.
What do you want to say here, crawling under the bouquets? All of this is, of course, a bit inadequate. But on the other hand, what does this tell us? First, throughout the years when the holiday was ridiculed and “cancelled,” people loved it, waited for it, and protected it. Secondly, there is a huge, huge demand in society for love and relationships and women’s desire to be women.
No matter how much women nag their faithful, there cannot be such a crowd for the flower without the call of the heart. These men who grab flowers from each other cannot all be “high heels”. There are things that cannot be imitated or imitated. Apparently, that’s exactly what happened during the March 8 holiday.
Yes, the holiday itself has already lost its original revolutionary meaning, as women went on strike and strike demanding equality and liberation. But this was preserved, it became an additional day off and the opportunity to once again say important and necessary words to loved ones. Even if on this day someone says “I love you” once again, then everything will not be in vain. Although no. The hysteria about flowers needs to be stopped somehow.
The author expresses his personal opinion, which may not coincide with the position of the editors.