The War of the Masculine and Feminine

The War of the Masculine and Feminine - Societal Implications. I would like to conclude this section by moving from the individual to the collective implications of reckoning and making peace between the mythic opposites. Archaeologist Marija Gimbutas challenged existing perceptions of human cultural evolution when her research revealed that the primordial deity for our Paleolithic and Neolithic ancestors clustered around a self-generating Goddess as a “ giver-of-life” rather than hunters and gathers that ruled by violence and power (Gimbutas, 1974/1982; 1989/1991). Her research took on symbolic significance for the feminist movement when she surmised that the earliest human cultures were sophisticated, matriarchal and peace loving. Gimbutas (1982) describes traditional cultural perceptions of masculine and feminine qualities. Those pertaining to the qualities of sinew, determination, strength, straightforwardness, hardness, determination and effectuality are considered masculine. These qualities are accessible to both women and men. When balanced, they involve discernment, protective, reason, discrimination, distinction, boundary, structure and product. The cultural archetype of feminine principals relate to qualities pertaining to cycle, rhythm, reciprocity, creativity, receptivity, inclusivity when in balance incorporate intuition, acceptance, feeling, unification, relationship, wholeness, beauty and process. Again, these elements are available to both men and women (Gimbutas, 1982; 1989). Carl Jung’s archetypal psychology had a similar concept of both feminine and masculine qualities within both genders. His theory of the human psyche included qualities of feminine and masculine archetypes within both men and women. He termed the feminine qualities within the male as the Anima and the masculine qualities in the female as the Animus (FOOTNOTE- or connection to Glossary Anima and Animus). As with the archetype of the Self or transcendent function (FOOTNOTE_ LINK THE Transcendent Function), each of these archetypes had both conscious and hidden elements. Wholeness, according to Jung’s model of individuation, involved bringing to consciousness the influence of hidden or shadow elements of these qualities operating within the psyche (refer "Archetypes of the Collective Unconscious," CW 9; The Transcendent Function," CW 8; The Syzygy: Anima and Animus," CW 9ii; 1953-1979) Riane Eisler (1987) discusses the transformative potential of inclusion of both archetypal masculine and feminine strengths in a cultural structure in The Chalice and The Blade. Eisler symbolizes the feminine principal as the chalice, the life generating and nurturing powers of the universe and the masculine principal as the blade, the ultimate power to establish and enforce domination. Eisler’s (1987) analysis of current and past cultural structures further clarify the capacity we may have as human beings to more effectively intervene in our own cultural evolution. Riane Eisler (1987) discusses the transformative potential of inclusion of both archetypal masculine and feminine strengths in a cultural structure in The Chalice and The Blade. Eisler symbolizes the feminine principal as the chalice, the life generating and nurturing powers of the universe and the masculine principal as the blade, the ultimate power to establish and enforce domination. Eisler’s (1987) analysis of current and past cultural structures further clarify the capacity we may have as human beings to more effectively intervene in our own cultural evolution. In her article outlining the implications of Eisler’s research in relation to social science and archaeology, Gimbutas states that until recently, anthropologists “have not been able to free themselves from the idea that prehistoric people were warlike, bloodthirsty savages, ruled by ‘big men’” (Gimbutas, 1988, pg 289). Gimbutas cites consistent evidence including sophisticated burial and artefacts as old as three million to one million years B.C, suggesting that ancient human culture was organised in a manner where feminine archetypal qualities of creativity, and inclusion worked in collaboration with archetypal masculine elements of clarity and reason. Gimbutas (1988), like Eisler (1987), surmise that the current patriarchal culture found its footing in the environment of Darwinian model of competition for limited resources in conjunction with extremist religious beliefs that promote domination of one gender over the other. The dominion of patriarchy, according to these researchers, was cemented through the externalization of the sacred as the domain of a dominant ruling God, accessible to only a select few. Eisler (2013) summarizes the four core components of the patriarchal domination model, one she believes to accurately describe the dominant western culture: The seeds of cultural transmission of domination are in the family structure that moulds the social institution. In family systems, children learn within the current paradigm, that men are strong, women are weak and men rightfully dominate women in all aspects of the family and the community. Cultural myths value ‘manly behaviours’ such as ‘heroic’ violence, conquest and control. Such qualities are not inherent in men but rather are associated with masculinity in the domination ideology. There is culturally accepted abuse and violence from child and wife-beating to chronic warfare. Every society has some abuse and violence. But in cultures orientating to the domination model, we find the institutionalization and even idealization of abuse and violence to maintain hierarchies of domination – man over woman, man over man, race over race, religion over religions, tribe over tribe, nation over nation. (Eisler, R (2013) Human Possibilities: An integrated systems approach, p.272) Relations of dominance and submission are considered inevitable and acceptable, normal and moral. This component allows for atrocities of women being stoned to death, races deemed to be inferior being exterminated or allowed to die without aid, children beaten to impose one’s will. Stories and teachings within dominant cultures condone and honour such acts. In great contrast to the domination model is what Eisler (2013) refers to as the partnership cultural model. She states that this model also consists of four core components that are interactive and sustaining: There is a democratic and egalitarian structure in the family and tribe that exists as a template for other institutions. While hierarchies may still exist, they are hierarchies of actualization rather than hierarchies of domination. In partnership cultures the focus is to empower, rather than disempower, to inspire and support rather than control. There is equal partnership between men and women. Both male and female capacities, and both genders, are valued equally. Violence and abuse is not culturally accepted, and while they exist, they are not institutionalized, idealized and are not condoned by partnership models. Violence is not considered to be necessary to maintain the hierarchy that exists in the domination model. While human nature may include the possibility of cruelty and violence, humans are also capable of support, empathy and caring relationships and these can prevail over others. Eisler (2013) concludes: The environments of cultures orientating to the domination model or the partnership model support the development and maintenance of difference neurochemical patters…[And such conditions] lead to the expression, or inhibition, of our great human capacity for caring and creativity or, alternatively, for cruelty and destructiveness. (Eisler, R (2013) Human Possibilities: An integrated systems approach, p. 279) Eisler (2013) highlights that even within a domination model, it is possible to make an evolutionary choice, and while we are deeply affected by our cultural environment, we can also affect it through conscious choice. This choice and the movement from domination to partnership cultures, she argues, must first occur in the relationships between genders and in parent-child relationships for lasting transformative change. It may be that a shift from domination to partnership models of relating may be a key aspect of our species’ survival. How do these cultural and gender elements relate to an investigation of the Self? I would argue that transformative change occurring in the family system and rippling out from there to societal and cultural change can only have a lasting and sustainable impact if one is aware of the internalized domination structures. As individuals moving toward wholeness we may benefit from bringing to consciousness the tendencies we have to be violent toward aspects of ourselves and to value masculine elements of rationality, clarity and intellect over feminine qualities of intuition, receptivity and creativity. If we can listen to the stories of tension between opposites that resonate within our individual psyches and find room to hold them with awareness and compassion, we then have the potential to circumvent unconsciously acting out of such impulses in our environment and our community. Listening to narratives of Self in its mythic guise can provide some guidance through this territory. Conclusion: Making Peace with opposites: Western culture is frequently focused on material acquisition. In a culture so rapidly evolving technologically, we struggle to create myths to guide and connect us to the mystery of the transcendent and remind us what it means to be a human being. For this reason, telling stories of connection with the Self are vital in the fast paced world in which we live. As mythologist Joseph Campbell suggested, such stories help create a personal mythology that can guide us to our deepest need for wholeness and our highest potential (Campbell, 1991). I believe that to learn from each other psychologically, culturally and spiritually is an important and necessary adjunct to the evolution of human consciousness. There is much to glean from a narrative, particularly one that is expressed in language that is both visual and written and speaks of the liminal stories that echo within us all. As human beings we share common stories, themes repeat through our lives and those of others. Human can erect divisions most often unconsciously. We can focus on our differences, our separateness rather than our interconnection with all life, each other, and the planet. As human beings, irrespective of our backgrounds, culture, racial or gender differences, mythic themes appear in our lives. We all experience love, loss ill health, suffering, joy and eventually, death. We share common stories and common challenges. Just as we all share the gift of being alive. These stories unite and humble us, they remind us of our fragility and impermanence and our dependence on the earth. They remind us of our strengths, our blessings and our connection with something larger than our personal identity. In this section, I have followed the thread of a myth that has been carried by all the women in my life: the search for belonging and protection in romantic love. My grandmother who I never met, attempted to end her life and died shortly after, broken-hearted and alone, abandoned by her lover with two young children. My mother desperately sought the healing of her childhood trauma in romantic love, searching for the belonging she never felt and didn’t rest easily with what she found. My experiences in romantic love for much of my life were subjugated and sabotaged by my personal search for union with the transcendent and desire for belonging. Romantic love also became the avenue through which I attempted to escape my own grief and trans-generational trauma. It is no surprise that my practice led research guided me into and through the myth of romantic love. Through the stories and art that emerged through the liminal space of my own psyche, I am now able to recognize that I have reached a more empowered, although considerably more humble position, where the protagonists of this potent myth reside within my own psyche and must continue to be reckoned with there. My research into masculine and feminine aspects has led me to deepen my understanding of how these manifest both individually and within human culture. I have discovered powerful and imperfect role models, women who can hold the tension of the feminine principal: Baba Yaga, like the Indian goddess Kali, who represents the power of the feminine to create and destroy; the beautiful and entitled Inanna, who in her arrogance and selfishness betrayed her sister in the underworld and met her retribution; the shadow queen, Ereshkigal who gives birth in the darkness of her grief and aloneness and creates new life from her suffering. I have also met the wounded masculine that I carried within: the man with no mind, with bleeding hands, who is silenced, suffering and unable to expose his vulnerability. These liminal encounters with my mythic selves seemed to speak most potently to the true nature of the human experience: that we are born in messy, beautiful and chaotic conditions; spend some time grooming and shaping our identity according to the cultural norms of our society, and then die in often messy, beautiful and chaotic conditions. I have learned that the potential for peace happens amongst this chaos, despite these conflicted selves. Language and metaphor visual or otherwise may eventually fail us in their capacity to communicate the sacred and the ineffable. The arts, however, have shown themselves to be the means by which I can communicate my experiences of the collective unconscious as it speaks to me obliquely through the language of liminal space. I believe the collective unconscious can dance through us in our creative expression and call to us through our embodied experience of the stories that push through our awareness from deep within. From my own stories and the many stories I have witnessed in my 25 years of clinical practice, I have learnt about the consequences of not listening to the stories of the Self. I have found that if we turn from the stories we carry within us, our earliest memories, those inherited from our ancestors and from the collective consciousness, we also turn from our empathy and our compassion for each other and ourselves. If we can walk the path within, we may move toward our own integration and healing, and assist that of the collective. We can remind ourselves of the sacred in the worlds within and without. By attending to our liminal stories, we may reposition our priorities and move toward our most individuated potential. In doing so, it may be that we can leave the world better for our short time upon it. We may become kinder and more aware of our interconnectedness with all life.