Wow, so much energy in this thread.
There is so much alive in me as I read all of your contributions. I am aware that I don’t have the time or capacity at the moment to go into all that I’d love to explore but maybe there is an invitation here for some deep exploration? Maybe one day…on zoom?
I am currently finishing up an article that I wrote that partly addresses some of the topics touched on here but from a different angle and offering a potentially different perspective.
One of the things that I could add here is that I see a lot of confusion (in the world) in the desire to transcend something WITHOUT fully including it. (I am here referring to the transcend and include well described by Ken Wilber as a necessary part of evolution). Each evolutionary stage transcends AND includes the previous stage and that means that ALL previous stages are a necessary part of the “more complex/more inclusive stage”.
I am saying that because in the context of the female physiology, for example. By wanting to go beyond the two sexes (which holds some truth to it) WITHOUT having fully included what it ACTUALLY means to be a full physiological female human is a bit complicated in my view. I’ll try to explain without being too over simplistic but also trying to keep it simple due to time constraints.
A female human menstruates for about 40 years of her life. This is a LOT. This doesn’t just means that she bleeds for about 4 days. What it means is that there is an invitation for her to live life embodying perspectives that are ONLY possible by being cyclical.
For example: when I am pre-menstrual or menstrual the pre-rational/magic (as per Gebser's work) is much more present in the forefront of my awareness. I am in the magical quite easily during those times which means a lot of things that need to be unpacked carefully maybe another time
( including more intuitive). But to the outside world, focused on “doing” this phase of my cycle is seen as “inconvenient” and therefore I was taught to suppress it from a very early age (which obviously backfired)
When I am closer to ovulation I am in the rational and this aspect of myself is much more celebrated by culture so I practiced, my whole life, being in the rational which (in reality) I am only truly in during half of my cycle. So there is a gap between how I ACTUALLY am, and how I have seen/felt myself to be. This is a massive blindspot I feel on the level of society.
What happens, and has happened (unfortunately) over the years is that this feedback loop between culture and self and who I am and what I am expected to be got really confused for many women (including myself here!) and it takes some active and deliberate work (that can only be done when you know to look for it) to INCLUDE what I (and many others) had transcended WITHOUT including. This transcending without including causes tremendous individual/collective and systemic pain not to say mess.
If you look at the whole of the physiological rites of passages that are exclusively female they are all in certain way either vilified or feared/controlled by the mainstream culture (to our peril).
It starts with girls feeling shame about their periods (which as you would probably guess deeply impacts their self-esteem), then it carries us into a way of giving birth that devalues a woman’s innate bodily intelligence and power (I have to say here that I don’t believe there is anyone to be blamed by this…it has been part of transcending the body without fully including it) and then it ends with menopause which again is super misunderstood by culture.
Some curious facts for example are that in tribes where women are celebrated as elders and their worth is not only linked to fertility there is no word for hot flushes and the transition into the “matriarch” of the tribe is a beautiful and celebrated one (I’m sure there are counter points to this but I feel there is also some deep wisdom).
So what I am saying is that I understand the desire to be more nuanced in the way we explain and think about sex and gender. I was even actively researching the growing up of sex and gender from a Developmental perspective supervised by Terri O’fallon (but I stopped this now for many reasons).
However without having women of future generations fully embrace what it even means to see reality from a female body (the hormones are the concrete expressions of much subtler energies that permeate the way a women experiences life/reality) I feel we are all missing a BIG piece in this co-creative dance between the masculine and feminine energies…so big part of my work in the world now is to, gently and slowly, start supporting the inclusion of that before it is fully transcended. (Which we all know what is not embraced or integrated can cause havoc in the form of shadow…)
I hope this makes sense. It is a very big topic so I already apologise if I offend anyone here with what I share. I’d love to explore more of this collectively.
Warmly,
Adriana
Lene,
In some of my circles “lady” has become associated with “old school” and maybe even sexist thinking. For example, at my Mom’s 80th b-day I heard some of the granddaughters noting that my mother used “lady” and “ladies” and they said it sounded very “old fashioned and traditional” and they would not refer to themselves as “ladies”.
Best,
G
From: tree of knowledge system discussion <
[log in to unmask]>
On Behalf Of Lene Rachel Andersen - Nordic Bildung
Sent: Monday, May 24, 2021 12:06 AM
To: [log in to unmask]Subject: Re: TOK Psychology Prof Removed From APA Discussion After Saying There Are Only 2 Genders (*Newsweek*)
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
How about reserving female and woman and male and man for the biological adult females and males respectively, and then use the terms lady and gentleman for the cultural female and male?
Then it would actually make sense to talk about a lady dick.
/ L
On 23-05-2021 13:48, Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx wrote:
Thanks for your reflections, Cory. I am in large agreement.
One thing I would like to comment on and add regarding this issue is that we can use the ToK map of reality and science to show that just thinking in terms of “biological” and “social” sides of the equation is insufficient. The reason is that it overlooks mental evolution and the behavioral inclinations we have as primates. This is the psychological or mental behavioral level of analysis.
This comes into high relief when we look at the masculine and feminine primate relational styles through lens of the Influence Matrix, as I point out in this blog:
It also speaks to Mike’s well argued points.
Best,
Gregg
From: tree of knowledge system discussion
<[log in to unmask]>
On Behalf Of Cory David Barker
Sent: Sunday, May 23, 2021 2:47 AM
To: [log in to unmask]Subject: Re: TOK Psychology Prof Removed From APA Discussion After Saying There Are Only 2 Genders (*Newsweek*)
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of JMU. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
--
Lene Rachel Andersen
Futurist, economist, author & keynote speaker
President of Nordic Bildung and co-founder of the European Bildung Network
Full member of the Club of Rome
Nordic Bildung
Vermlandsgade 51, 2300 Copenhagen S, Denmark
www.nordicbildung.org
+45 28 96 42 40
############################
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to: mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1
To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1