everything i guess
Posted: Sat Jan 19, 2019 7:58 am
neat little blurb i stole from a facebook friend. obviously it's possible to read "masculine" and "feminine" in a few different ways, could probably come up with several different readings on the whole thing if you wanted to
https://eco-poiesis.blog/
"Traditional masculine fantasy is that of absolute autonomous existence, creation of something from nothing (creatio ex nihilo) and a complete rational comprehension of reality. This masculine fantasy has it's highest expression in that great phantasy that is God Himself, who, creating the world from nothing, stands over and above his creation and is the very Logos or rationality for reality itself. Not only did Man create God, but he projected his fantasy onto that phantasy in its total completeness: God is but the perfect Man. Through this projection Man was able to convince himself of the contradictory notion that his fantasy was both a reality and a possibility.
The history of patriarchy is the history of imposing this idealistic fantasy onto worldly existence. The very existence of woman undermines his fantasy: because his life in the polis is dependent upon the labor of his feminine counterparts, he is not truly autonomous. Because he is created by his mother's labor, he is not created from nothing. Because woman will always resist his attempts to calculate and control her, reality transcends his rational comprehension. And so in his war against the Truth of interdependence, of conditionality, of supra-rationality, he erects a State which would legitimate through sheer force and ideological mystification, his falsity as truth, his abstraction for concreteness. Woman is his gateway to Truth and Beyond, and for this he both hates her and loves her.
Perhaps what Man fears the most is not merely his equality to the feminine, but of his subordinate position to her: that the masculine is derivative of the feminine which is primary, a mere contingency relative to her necessity. The violence of this world is a consequence of Man's flipping it upside-down: he has made his own, masculine values primary at the expense of the feminine values defined against his values. His "independence" is only possible because of interdependence with her, his "wealth" is only possible by her labor, his representation is only possible by her presentation, his freedom only possible by her service to him. He lives only because she dies.
I think the way out, to turn upright this upside down world, is not to merely attack and criticize masculinity, it is important to redefine it: the function of the masculine is subordination to the feminine, masculinity defined not as a position of leadership but of facilitation; not master over others but Master of his Self. Yet the key here is that this cannot be a unilateral masculinity, for it must only be a part of his self. That he masters his ego is a condition for facilitating the feminine to arise in himself, realizing that that which he simultaneously loves and hates is a part of his own being and is not separate from it.
Only through the recognition that the Other is within him, and that his hatred of the feminine is just a facade veiling the unconscious dissatisfaction he has with his own nature, and that his fetishisation of the feminine is just a distraction from his own need to turn that love inward, can Man finally embark on the path towards achieving satisfaction with life. Through this achievement, Man no longer sees himself as man as such: the duality of masculine and feminine is abandoned. What arises in it's place is the divine reality, the non-binary Buddha-Nature, which transcends the duality of masculine and feminine.
So perhaps, the most courageous, noble, brave, virtuous, rational, thing he can do is to limit his Self: the most masculine thing a man can do is no longer care about or need to prove his masculinity. Through this, he transcends his finite, fearful existence and embarks on the path towards a divine reality in consummation with the Infinite."
https://eco-poiesis.blog/
"Traditional masculine fantasy is that of absolute autonomous existence, creation of something from nothing (creatio ex nihilo) and a complete rational comprehension of reality. This masculine fantasy has it's highest expression in that great phantasy that is God Himself, who, creating the world from nothing, stands over and above his creation and is the very Logos or rationality for reality itself. Not only did Man create God, but he projected his fantasy onto that phantasy in its total completeness: God is but the perfect Man. Through this projection Man was able to convince himself of the contradictory notion that his fantasy was both a reality and a possibility.
The history of patriarchy is the history of imposing this idealistic fantasy onto worldly existence. The very existence of woman undermines his fantasy: because his life in the polis is dependent upon the labor of his feminine counterparts, he is not truly autonomous. Because he is created by his mother's labor, he is not created from nothing. Because woman will always resist his attempts to calculate and control her, reality transcends his rational comprehension. And so in his war against the Truth of interdependence, of conditionality, of supra-rationality, he erects a State which would legitimate through sheer force and ideological mystification, his falsity as truth, his abstraction for concreteness. Woman is his gateway to Truth and Beyond, and for this he both hates her and loves her.
Perhaps what Man fears the most is not merely his equality to the feminine, but of his subordinate position to her: that the masculine is derivative of the feminine which is primary, a mere contingency relative to her necessity. The violence of this world is a consequence of Man's flipping it upside-down: he has made his own, masculine values primary at the expense of the feminine values defined against his values. His "independence" is only possible because of interdependence with her, his "wealth" is only possible by her labor, his representation is only possible by her presentation, his freedom only possible by her service to him. He lives only because she dies.
I think the way out, to turn upright this upside down world, is not to merely attack and criticize masculinity, it is important to redefine it: the function of the masculine is subordination to the feminine, masculinity defined not as a position of leadership but of facilitation; not master over others but Master of his Self. Yet the key here is that this cannot be a unilateral masculinity, for it must only be a part of his self. That he masters his ego is a condition for facilitating the feminine to arise in himself, realizing that that which he simultaneously loves and hates is a part of his own being and is not separate from it.
Only through the recognition that the Other is within him, and that his hatred of the feminine is just a facade veiling the unconscious dissatisfaction he has with his own nature, and that his fetishisation of the feminine is just a distraction from his own need to turn that love inward, can Man finally embark on the path towards achieving satisfaction with life. Through this achievement, Man no longer sees himself as man as such: the duality of masculine and feminine is abandoned. What arises in it's place is the divine reality, the non-binary Buddha-Nature, which transcends the duality of masculine and feminine.
So perhaps, the most courageous, noble, brave, virtuous, rational, thing he can do is to limit his Self: the most masculine thing a man can do is no longer care about or need to prove his masculinity. Through this, he transcends his finite, fearful existence and embarks on the path towards a divine reality in consummation with the Infinite."