on masculine & feminine
Posted on Feb 12th, 2006
by 
sass
sass
there has been quite a bit of talk around the traps at zaadz
about the release of the ILP kit ..
which I am fascinated to have a look at, if not a try of,
(although my student/single mama income precludes purchase at the moment).
My interest was particularly piqued by discussion on Jean's "the Human Bean" blog (via Paul's blog) about the ILP kit and feminine versus masculine practice.
I can't help being .... well, deeply excited, by such discussion, as, for the most part, on most days, I am working on weaving a conversation between feminist and integral theory with myself as intermediary (ie, writing a PhD), so, finding a community discussing such things is a wild joy!
So, in the spirit of this conversation, below is a taster (excerpts) from a paper I wrote for the Women's ILP at the Omega Institute in 2005
I would love others to wade on in with me.
Integral Life Practice for Women: Power, freedom and fullness
The Zen bell rings across a crisp sky, dark and awake with stars.
Four thirty, waking : “Can this be morning?”.
The mist not yet rolled its caress through the trees.
A brisk walk around the hall, green tea, and before me, hours on the cushion.
This morning I am greeted by a wild resistance. Tossed in waves of anguished thought, the question returns: “Is this type of practice my form?”
Here we leave our lives, pare down to the basics : eating, sleeping, toilet and our practice. The Zen sesshin is formed with a group of fellow meditators. In the embrace of their circle I sit day upon day. The intent of our focus brings me back, again and again, to my pillow. Together we meditate over long hours. My back cramps. Sounds of laughter hit the hills, grief snakes the room. For days I can be lost in the mad movie of my mind. Stripping back to find the spaciousness of neither gaining nor losing; finding in the apex of the moment, vast openness.
My questioning of practice form sits in the broader context of questions about the relationship between women, feminine type and the unfolding of developmental stages. The struggle between my appreciation of the disciple of Zen form (the constraint of focus necessary to the interrogation of self ) and my disinclination to be rigidly bound (or rather, my inclination towards gentleness and flow) is a starting point for these musings. And at the very heart of these musings is the desire to unfold the possibilities of fully inhabiting and radiating being in the world, as woman.
In the context of Integral Life Practice the strictured practice of disciplined, goal seeking, outcome focused practice has been suggested as ‘masculine’ form. Whereas ‘practice in life’- the form of awareness practice that happens in and as life, without distinction between practice and life - is suggested as ‘feminine’ type. I wonder about the where’s and why’s of boundaries formed between life and contemplative practice. Could creative, aesthetic and relational practices (dance, writing, gardening, singing, my relationships), the things that light me up, be as strongly and importantly considered transformative practices as contemplation?
The wholistic theory of Integral Life Practice suggests so; recommending that practice should lead with dominant type ( which might be ‘feminine’ type for women) while also working against type (‘masculine’), to bring a balance. There are two necessary poles here, which, meeting in a joyful tension, open the path of practice as both in and as life, and as the rigour of a necessary discipline of practice.
It has been suggested that women may find that they privilege more feminine modes of practice. I know from experience that my inclination is oriented towards practice as a cultivation of joy: towards gentler paths of deep rest, love, creativity and flow. In cultivating love there is less resistance, the boundary between life and practice is less harsh. Here I look to find a space where my love for life brings me to practice, to love practice, and my practice in turn brings me to love life. On one hand I want to honour where my motivation rises, so that the return to practice is joyful, on the other I want to push myself, to maintain a disciplined approach that challenges my boundaries. This seems important in acknowledging where I am at, balancing working in and with my type and against it. Neither allowing a fall into formlessness, nor forcing an anathematic constraint that conjures tsunamis of resistance into being.
The designations masculine and feminine have concerned feminist theorists and philosophers particularly, who have identified the notion of the ‘feminine’ as supportive, nurturing ground (communion) to ‘masculine’’s assertive, individuality (agency) as underlying problematic social constitutions of gender.
........
. I believe, along with [feminist theorists], that it is important that we give full regard to the ‘feminine’. It is also equally important that we should also be clear that those things named the ‘feminine’ are qualities which are not related to women in perpetuity. It is a mix of cultural, social, psychological and physiological factors that determine the manifestation of feminine and masculine attributes. In exploring the practice of self development it is important to both utilise the existing pool of knowledge and practices (the canon of teaching in the great transformation traditions, coupled with scientific insight) and also to acknowledge that less is currently known, or documented, in relation to the specifics of women’s developmental and spiritual practices. Separating type from gender, we should not collapse our inquiry into the depths of the questions: What is feminine? What, masculine? And how they relate to man and woman?
......
about the release of the ILP kit ..
which I am fascinated to have a look at, if not a try of,
(although my student/single mama income precludes purchase at the moment).
My interest was particularly piqued by discussion on Jean's "the Human Bean" blog (via Paul's blog) about the ILP kit and feminine versus masculine practice.
I can't help being .... well, deeply excited, by such discussion, as, for the most part, on most days, I am working on weaving a conversation between feminist and integral theory with myself as intermediary (ie, writing a PhD), so, finding a community discussing such things is a wild joy!
So, in the spirit of this conversation, below is a taster (excerpts) from a paper I wrote for the Women's ILP at the Omega Institute in 2005
I would love others to wade on in with me.
Integral Life Practice for Women: Power, freedom and fullness
The Zen bell rings across a crisp sky, dark and awake with stars.
Four thirty, waking : “Can this be morning?”.
The mist not yet rolled its caress through the trees.
A brisk walk around the hall, green tea, and before me, hours on the cushion.
This morning I am greeted by a wild resistance. Tossed in waves of anguished thought, the question returns: “Is this type of practice my form?”
Here we leave our lives, pare down to the basics : eating, sleeping, toilet and our practice. The Zen sesshin is formed with a group of fellow meditators. In the embrace of their circle I sit day upon day. The intent of our focus brings me back, again and again, to my pillow. Together we meditate over long hours. My back cramps. Sounds of laughter hit the hills, grief snakes the room. For days I can be lost in the mad movie of my mind. Stripping back to find the spaciousness of neither gaining nor losing; finding in the apex of the moment, vast openness.
My questioning of practice form sits in the broader context of questions about the relationship between women, feminine type and the unfolding of developmental stages. The struggle between my appreciation of the disciple of Zen form (the constraint of focus necessary to the interrogation of self ) and my disinclination to be rigidly bound (or rather, my inclination towards gentleness and flow) is a starting point for these musings. And at the very heart of these musings is the desire to unfold the possibilities of fully inhabiting and radiating being in the world, as woman.
In the context of Integral Life Practice the strictured practice of disciplined, goal seeking, outcome focused practice has been suggested as ‘masculine’ form. Whereas ‘practice in life’- the form of awareness practice that happens in and as life, without distinction between practice and life - is suggested as ‘feminine’ type. I wonder about the where’s and why’s of boundaries formed between life and contemplative practice. Could creative, aesthetic and relational practices (dance, writing, gardening, singing, my relationships), the things that light me up, be as strongly and importantly considered transformative practices as contemplation?
The wholistic theory of Integral Life Practice suggests so; recommending that practice should lead with dominant type ( which might be ‘feminine’ type for women) while also working against type (‘masculine’), to bring a balance. There are two necessary poles here, which, meeting in a joyful tension, open the path of practice as both in and as life, and as the rigour of a necessary discipline of practice.
It has been suggested that women may find that they privilege more feminine modes of practice. I know from experience that my inclination is oriented towards practice as a cultivation of joy: towards gentler paths of deep rest, love, creativity and flow. In cultivating love there is less resistance, the boundary between life and practice is less harsh. Here I look to find a space where my love for life brings me to practice, to love practice, and my practice in turn brings me to love life. On one hand I want to honour where my motivation rises, so that the return to practice is joyful, on the other I want to push myself, to maintain a disciplined approach that challenges my boundaries. This seems important in acknowledging where I am at, balancing working in and with my type and against it. Neither allowing a fall into formlessness, nor forcing an anathematic constraint that conjures tsunamis of resistance into being.
The designations masculine and feminine have concerned feminist theorists and philosophers particularly, who have identified the notion of the ‘feminine’ as supportive, nurturing ground (communion) to ‘masculine’’s assertive, individuality (agency) as underlying problematic social constitutions of gender.
........
. I believe, along with [feminist theorists], that it is important that we give full regard to the ‘feminine’. It is also equally important that we should also be clear that those things named the ‘feminine’ are qualities which are not related to women in perpetuity. It is a mix of cultural, social, psychological and physiological factors that determine the manifestation of feminine and masculine attributes. In exploring the practice of self development it is important to both utilise the existing pool of knowledge and practices (the canon of teaching in the great transformation traditions, coupled with scientific insight) and also to acknowledge that less is currently known, or documented, in relation to the specifics of women’s developmental and spiritual practices. Separating type from gender, we should not collapse our inquiry into the depths of the questions: What is feminine? What, masculine? And how they relate to man and woman?
......
Access: Public
retreat
May 2008
“It is also equally important that we should also be clear that those things named the ‘feminine’ are qualities which are not related to women in perpetuity. It is a mix of cultural, social, psychological and physiological factors that determine the manifestation of feminine and masculine attributes.”
Yeah, indeed I, being a male, discovered (at the Nov. ILP) that I identify more with the feminine (static feminine if I recall correctly) than the masculine (physical attributes aside). It was an interesting (and joyful) self-recognition.
Hi Matthew,
That’s a nice point.
I need to check out those definitions of static / dynamic feminine and masculine.
Anyone got a reference for where to find them?
Your inquiry is one that has been equally of interest to me as well. Its a difficult one for many reasons and as you point out the complexities of the inquiry are endless. I do find that I am at times attracted more or less to one side or the other of the masculine/feminine dance and also know the pathological sides of falling to fully into one without balance of the other.
At this point in time I’m more identified with a feminine flow of erotic energy that often times is overwhelmingly intense with the desire to touch/merge with all things. When in the more masculine form of expression I find myself relatively untouched by objects,people, events, emotions, desire etc. But in the feminine I am completely devoted to them, surrendered to them, each object becomes its own expression of Spirit in the most full and erotically enticing way possible and even eating can become the equivelant to an orgasm if surrendered to in the feminine spirit.
Anyways, thats a simplistic overveiw of my own sense and how they express through my vehicle. I’m interested to be part of further inquiry with you.
“…and even eating can become the equivelant to an orgasm if surrendered to in the feminine spirit.”
Nice. I wonder to what extent resting in such feminine energetic flows might spontaneously yield to or tap into their masculine counterpart. To the degree I ease into the feeling-sense of experience, might it release awareness in its midst in sharper moments of spontaneous brilliance than if I was just trying to always be aware? Might putting the feminine first make the masculine more available than vice-versa? Certainly for me, a man, this is often true.
Maybe this enquiry can then even open into asking myself what my particular style of relating the masculine and feminine modes to each other is. How do I wish to dance this entire polarity today? How can I feel the dynamic eros between these inseparable poles of my experience come alive and awake between them? How do I hold myself in the midst of this ongoing dance? What’s my style of Being?
Sass, thank you for your unique presence here. My discussion with you by email and this thread has evoked a recent reflection for me on sacred gender. I’ve also started an open thread to consider this theme over at my neck of the woods, though I’ll be checking back here as well. Let’s amplify this important discussion!
I love it!
You are stretching my thinking in all sorts of directions.
Vanessa, I love the sensual language that you use to express the manifestation of the draw and play of feminine energies.
And Chris, I wonder if there is not, one on hand, the possibility that moving deeply into one flow of energy would potentially meet the other pole.. and yet, also the possibility that dwelling in just one side manifests pathologically ?
So yes, how do we dance, acknowleding the way energies meet and play with one another?
I wonder when and where our preference for one energetic style should be honoured and where it should be challenged (is it my shadow rising up?)?
Albeit simply the humble opinion of one silly girl, I believe that the masculine cannot be separated from the feminine, nor vice versa… They are like two stars caught in each other’s orbits, in doing so they shine as one, yet the trained eye can descern the undulating dance that both draws them together and repells them from one another…
For each dynamic act of one type of energy, there is the static representation of the other, like figure and ground, balancing each other out. The tricky part is where you place your focus!
Addimittedly, I tend to be dynamic masculine in my teaching persona, yet dynamic feminine in my personal life. Hell, I’m most likely both in my therapy office, depending on the moon!
Sometimes I like to play with these polarities in my own vessel… Intentionally switching between the two perspectives in certain situations in order to gain a richer understanding… Taking the “opposite” energetic perspective at times and walking around in it for a while.