Honest Communication as the Path
We’re at an age where many of us are beginning to understand the universal principle of gender. As an energetic principle, we all have feminine and masculine aspects working within and around us. Understanding these principles can help us to align with our highest expression of these aspects. Empowered with the knowledge needed for us to step into our highest expression, we become better and better versions of ourselves as time goes on.
Misconceptions & Modern Times
There are many misconceptions around masculinity. We don’t need to look too deep below the surface to find the layers of conditioning; masculinity is often associated with brute strength, assertiveness, courage, leadership and bravery. Now, when we look towards the way we’ve evolved, we recognize that the embodiment of this principle becomes less and less physical. We’ve already invented the wheel, forged new inventions and blazed plenty of trails. Now is the time in human history where we can begin to really refine the masculine principle into its Divine form.
So, here we are, poised with the question of ‘how does the Divine Masculine communicate through me?’
The answer may be different for all of us. Yet there are some basic underlying principles that are important to acknowledge. When we apply the traditional traits of masculinity (strength, assertiveness, leadership) toward these modern times, we see that what’s really valiant is to apply these principles to the way we communicate our truth. Embodying the masculine principle in the way we communicate looks like openness and honesty. Oriented toward truth, we usher in clarity with compassion, never shying away from the power of whatever message we’re seeking to get across.
Compassion and Honesty
Through this compassionate expression of one’s truth, the people we’re communicating with are able to better understand where they stand. When I am embodying the principle of Divine Masculinity, I am not only able to clearly and compassionately articulate my truth and know exactly where I stand on any given matter, but I also allow others to know where they stand in relationship to me. The people in my life always know where they stand with me. I share my message gently, and with care, always orienting toward the importance of the intentionality behind my communication. When honesty is at the core, we calibrate to truth, and that is honorable.
Perhaps you can think of something you’ve been wanting to communicate to someone in your life. This is your invitation to practice a bit, perhaps with yourself first, finding compassion in the way your truth is communicated. Step by step, the Divine Masculine principle will continue to crystallize in your field as you become a stronger and more compassionately courageous human being!
So, we all know the term ‘physics’. Yet, how many of us are adept in understanding the term ‘metaphysics’? What’s the difference? (If you haven’t read our prior post around this topic, dive in).
Bluntly put, metaphysics provide a framework for understanding how our universe works (not just the physical matter that we perceive in our ‘reality’).
Alright, so let’s get back to our topic at hand; ‘toxic masculinity’. When I say that this concept is not real, I am saying that this term is subjective.
All subjectivity is ultimately not real.
The term “toxic masculinity” does not mean the same thing to everyone. There is no shared agreement or understanding about what is toxic versus not toxic. There is also a lot of confusion about what is masculine, but we’ll get to that later.
So when you put two words together to describe behaviors for which there is no shared agreement you end up with not meaning anything at all.
If one person can label a cis-straight male asking a woman out on a date “toxic,” and another person thinks that’s completely acceptable behavior, then there’s nothing objective or real about that distinction. If two people see a man open the door for a woman, and one reports it as toxic while another reports it as him simply being a gentleman, was it toxic masculinity?
“Objective” or “real” means there’s something observable and measurable that does not change based on who’s looking. That there’s agreement based on a shared experience. You don’t have that with ‘toxic masculinity.’
You see, something that is objectively real can’t be changed by your thoughts, opinions, or beliefs.
Conversely, anything that can be changed just by thinking about it, is subjective, or not real.
I can’t think a chair into being a car. I can say it’s a car, tell others it’s a car, and convince my baby brother that if he sits on the chair we can go for a ride, but the reality is, at the end of the day, it’s still a chair. And to my little brother’s dismay, it’s not going anywhere.
This is illustrated in the evolution of how LGBT became LGBTQII2+. If these distinctions were real, then they could not change. The reality is that as long as you can keep adding distinctions to the pile of letters sexual orientation has become, then you’re clearly talking about something subjective, not objective, not real. If the distinctions were real, then they wouldn’t need to be explained, adapted, contextualized, re-defined, parsed out, distinguished in ANY way, and then added onto by successive generations. They would just be…unfettered in their objective truth.
We’re creating new levels of distinctions to try and get at more nuances of identity and expression.
But none of that’s real. It’s convenient maybe, has meaning to some, but it’s not real.
Are these distinctions useful to people? Sure. I like telling women I’m a gay man. It relieves them of the social labor of having to guard themselves against me hitting on them with a sexual motive, when I’m merely trying to have a pleasant conversation. But how many gay men have actually had sex with a woman? I personally know many gay
men who have not only children, but also grandchildren. So clearly they’ve had sex with women.
So the distinction, while convenient and maybe even meaningful, is not real.
Clearly being “gay” doesn’t mean the same thing to everyone.
Are you gay because you are male and have had a sexual experience with another man? Isn’t that what a bisexual male does? How many straight men have experimented sexually with other men? Does one gay experience make you gay? Or is there a minimum number, like 5 times, and then you’re officially gay.
Are you only gay if you march in parades and proudly display your homosexuality? Does eschewing that behavior mean we ‘take your Gay card away?’
As you all know, only you can define this identity for yourself. No one can tell you whether you’re gay, bi, whatever. I don’t care what you are, if it serves you, go for it. But if I and no one else can tell by looking at you or your behavior and make that distinction accurately most of the time, it isn’t a real distinction.
It’s convenient and maybe even meaningful, but it’s not real.
Here’s another example: We know that the experience of a black trans man is not the same as a white trans woman. Just because they’re both trans doesn’t mean they have the same experience.
Their race brings a very different dimension to their identity and experience in our culture. This is due to the effect of intersectionality on identity.
So when I tell you they are both trans, does that communicate anything meaningful to you about their experience? Does the term distinguish something or tell you something that helps you understand their experience holistically? It may, but also, it may not.
So the distinction, while convenient and maybe even meaningful, is not real.
Misunderstanding what’s objectively real versus what’s subjectively real, meaning what’s real for me and maybe not real for you, is the source of endless confusion in our society.
When we replace reality with subjectivity, we are damaging our own ability to understand who we really are, to find our place in the world, and most importantly: to navigate and adapt to change.
Throughout the ages, humans have learned to live in increasingly complex environments. Charles Darwin, father of the theory of evolution said, “It’s not the strongest or the most intelligent who will survive, the future belongs to those who can best manage change.”
Because we have forgotten who we are, I believe we now live in a world where humans have forgotten how to be human.
The core work of being human is learning to ask the right questions. The only source of ‘capital T’ Truth is you!
Truth resonates with the wisdom of the heart. So, let your answers come from your heart. Your mind is polluted with all sorts of confusing thoughts and ideas programmed into you by society, or ingrained from prior traumas and dramas that aren’t who you truly are.
Our methods to distinguish what’s right from wrong, such as labeling behaviors as ‘toxic masculinity’ are actually creating more separation and hate, when what we really need is unity and love.
I say this, because our kids today are confused. By not pointing out which way is objectively north, they have no true orientation, no way to navigate the complexities of modern living.
For the sake of their psychological health, at least be clear that there’s a real, true difference between a man and woman. Stop pretending like there’s not.
Gender is real.
It’s embedded into reality in a way that will persist ever after we, and our opinions, die.
But “Toxic Masculinity” is not real. It’s a subjective opinion masquerading as objective reality. This is dangerous.
I’m just asking you to stop believing your subjective reality is objectively real. It’s not!
Trust me, you don’t need other people to validate your subjective reality in order to thrive. Gay men do it all the time. We learn to thrive in environments where other people disagree with our reality. Every day. 24/7. That’s life.
Here we are, entering into the season of celebrating our Mothers, amidst all the birth and renewal of Springtime. So, it’s a perfect time to take a look at our underlying assumptions that drive our values and ways of being. Specifically, with regard to the archetype of Mother, and what that may mean within a larger cultural context.
First, let’s dive into what we really mean when we speak about the Mother Archetype. According to Carl Jung, the archetype of the Mother is first developed within the early childhood psyche. For him, he saw the maternal, motherly ideals as projections onto one’s primary caregiver (regardless of whether or not that individual is one’s biological mother). In sum, Jung established a sense of early childhood awareness of the archetype as one that provides sustenance, care, loving attention and comfort.
In essence, the Mother archetype encompasses all that cherishes and fosters growth, sustains and nurtures life, and breathes attentive awareness toward the surrounding environment.
So, now that we have a more solid understanding of the Mother archetype, let’s go deeper still. What’s beneath all this? If you haven’t gotten the sense from our blog posts yet, we like to navigate the subconscious and bring what’s in the dark out into light. By illuminating some of the beliefs around the Mother, we can work to dismantle the part of us that takes the archetype for granted.
By bringing this out into the open, my hopes and intentions point toward the embodiment and empowerment of Divine feminine energy through a deeper, nuanced understanding. The truth is that many folks have misunderstood the feminine. Through an irrational deduction, folks have generally equated the yin and yang to passive and active. The feminine being the former and the masculine being the latter. Many regard ‘being in your feminine’ as being soft and caring, gentle and unobtrusive.
Altruistic and Holistic Augmentation
In actuality, the feminine couldn’t be further from passive. It’s time we clear some things up. There’s been a big mixup and we now get to augment our understanding. Being ‘in your feminine’ is hardly a passive thing. It requires a lot of energy to be receptive and aware enough to hold a container. Cultivation of this receptivity can take years of refinement and discipline. There is nothing passive about this receptivity; while the feminine is often less associated with ‘action’, there is indeed an action done while holding a container. There is a need for deep work, observation, sense making and continuous calibration in real time.
So, after a brief skim on the surface, how does this feel? Do we think we can adjust our baseline understanding of the feminine Mother archetype? Perhaps we can depart from the active/passive dichotomy and move into recognizing the energetic exchanges that are actually at play. Only then can we truly encounter the depth of love and active compassion the Mother archetype of the feminine has to share.