Confusing Rubric Coquettish - not enough in the homeopathic repertories

Q: One rubric that has always had me confused is "Coquettish - not enough" - does that mean if I don't make eyes at my homeopath, it's a sign of pathology?

A: The English dictionary meaning of COQUETTISH is "trying to gain the attention of men without serious feelings", which, right or wrongly, defines it as a women-only symptom.

To understand the intended meaning of rubrics in the Repertory, it is a good practice to read its subrubrics. In this case, they are "not enough" and "too much". Whereas we may understand that someone can be "too coquettish", it is much harder to understand how a woman can be "not coquettish enough": do women need to be "not serious"?

So we need a small investigation, across languages this time. Although several authors contributed to this rubric, the origin of this rubric is found in Jean-Pierre Gallavardin's work (Répertoire de médecine psychique). If we check the French dictionaries we see that "coquette" is defined as "desiring to please" or even just "gracious and elegant". It is stipulated that a coquettish person tries to please the person of the opposite sex, so not a women-only symptom.

Consequently, the symptom definition of coquettish should be "desiring to please the opposite sex by grace and elegance". That can be achieved by one or more of these tool kits:

1. - make up (women: lipstick, eye shadow, eyelashes; both sexes: perfume)
2. - clothing (both sexes: décolleté, flashy colors; women: high heels) 
3. - gestures (both sexes: ways to look, to move the hands, the hips)

For sure, some readers will not agree with some examples. That is normal, because, as for any symptom, we must consider the "context" of the symptom. Possible contexts are: age, race, country, religion, sex, etc. 

Young girls going to a party will be called (not enough) coquettish following different criteria than women adhering a religion which forbids any coquetry.

To know whether it is a symptom making up your eyes to see a homeopath, you need to consider what most women in the same context would do.

At last, be aware that George Vithoulkas added sulphur to this rubric. That confirms the above- mentioned way to use this rubric: sulphur has "Mind - Indifference - appearance; to his personal", "Mind - Elegance - want of elegance" and "Mind - Tastelessness in dressing". All these are cross-references to our symptom under investigation.

(Derived from Frederik Schroyens write-up)