Over a month ago, I promised a fellow blogger Dan Munro, that I would do a blog about one of his, he didn’t pay me to write this – “brilliant” blog from Inspirational Life –
What fascinated me was his explanation of how certain men had interpreted to the Feminist movement had caused many men to become “passive” sexually, due to their concern about being viewed as chauvinists, sexual deviants, etc. Basically, these men have psychologically emasculated themselves and feel safer to wait for women’s green light for them to make the sexual initiative, rather than assertively setting the scene for sex.
Maybe it isn’t politically correct to challenge the outcomes of the Feminist Movement, but here we are with a strange situation where there are more single people than ever who have no clue as to how to go about courting each other, more confused than ever as to how to love each other.
I have been pondering this forever, since my parents divorced when I was 4 years of age, and had observed the confusing dynamics between my mother and her boyfriends, and my father and his girlfriends and 2 wives, and then on to my own attempts at figuring out the holy grail of relationships. How has something – male/female relationships – which has over-populated the planet, suddenly become such a mystery to the most “educated” people on the planet?
Perhaps it was always a mystery? Look at the story of Adam and Eve. It is clear that they had different agendas, and were ignorant of this dissonance until it was too late.
While doing my daily meditation, the thought came to me – perhaps our problem is not – women being more like men, and men being more like women, and us all being confused about this, but rather that we are stuck in the mythology of what IS male and female. And certainly it is the LGBTQ movement that brings this up most forcefully.
I suggest we look at the idea of masculine as a gender-neutral concept of assertive energy ( which both men are able to access within themselves) and that the feminine is a gender-neutral concept of receptive energy (which again both men and women are capable of accessing within themselves.) I believe what we need to understand is not how to be more like men or women, but rather how to properly express assertive and receptive energies and which situations calls for which kind of energy.
Once we loosen ourselves from the IMPORTANCE of masculine and feminine as determinants of HOW we should act, then we can liberate ourselves and society from the shaming that comes with men and women acting outside of the societal norms.
Now, perhaps you think, this is exactly what was the motive of the Feminist movement, to abolish the sexual stereotypes. Well, perhaps that was the intention in some circles. But what happened is that the world just got a bit more aggressive, as both women and men turned away from the receptive and nurturing energies, to focus on asserting themselves in the world. Ironically, in the early days of the women’s movement, it was women who were the most hostile to women who chose to “stay home”, as if these stay-at-home Mom’s were copping out in some way.
What ended up happening is that while women were “liberated” into the workplace, the rules never changed to accommodate the different energies, skill sets, and needs of women. The workplace remained the domain of men, and women just had to fit in as best they could. And yes, women adapted successfully, but they have yet to be equitably rewarded for it either professionally or personally. Plus there was a price to be paid. Women have bought the propaganda that assertive energies are always better than receptive energies, to this day, have become less fluent in accessing their receptive energies in an empowering way. It is only now, in the new economy of start-ups and the proliferation of freelance/solo-preneurs, that women are starting to reshape the workplace according to their needs and preferences.
And I think because our society has become so market-driven, that until the idea of promoting what is typically referred to as “feminine” energy, but I want to refer to as receptive, is seen as profitable to the society as a whole … we will remain imbalanced as a society.
As a little worldview sidenote –
I think deep in the world political/economic system – the intransigence is not much against the earth and women, but against this idea of receptive energy. A perfect example of this is Fossil fuels vs. sustainable fuels – Fossil fuel producers have typically drilled into the earth and extracted the resources, leaving the earth ravaged and barren. Solar and wind, hydro-electric – technology is built to receive the energy/power of the earth with the earth left in its original state.
If we take away the male/female labeling, we can be more pragmatic about how to use our energies best in what arenas … in the case of energy production – assertively and aggressively extracting resources is not sustainable, but promoting the technology to efficiently receive and collect what we already have is sustainable into the unforeseen future.
And if we return to the more personal exchange of assertive vs. receptive energies between lovers – what we really need to understand is – what are the preferences of our lovers’. In Dan Munro’s post – he echos what I have read/heard about many women wanting to be “ravaged”, for men to “take control.” And while I agree to some extent to this preference, let’s not go broad strokes here – we don’t want to turn back the clock so that we are stuck with one way of being as a man or woman. We just need to tune into what we and our partners’ want at the time.
I really think it is about knowing who you are, and what you want in each situation as it arrives. And this means being open and accepting which are both receptive skills that set the scene for a more successful sexual relationship. In order to assert one’s preferences, one’s partner needs to be receptive, and vice versa. It isn’t about men or women being ONE way or the other, but just using the energy tools from camps assertive and receptive as needed.
IF we tie the idea of assertive solely to masculine ways of being , and receptive solely to feminine ways of being, we really are painting ourselves into a very cramped box, that limits our imaginations whether they be in the bedroom or the boardroom.
This is an idea that I really want to stretch to its limits … so I may be ruminating upon it for a while. You have been warned : )