Men And Dresses

Seems to be one that is happening at the moment, and there are some important things within this conversation, and I also feel annoyed by it because from an integral perspective it’s actually quite a stupid conversation.

Nevertheless, it’s a good platform to dig a bit deeper into polarity which seems to be one of the hot flavours of this year.

Polarity, to me, is a very multi-layered and complex topic to go into. I’ll do my best to elaborate yet, due to this complexity, I’m liable to fail in places.

Polarity is the fundamental driving force of this universe. We live in a universe of duality and, as a result, it is both created and sustained by polarity – twoness.

The first split of one-ness (non-duality) into two-ness we can think of as the original polarity.

This polarity seems to be the split between consciousness and matter.

Interior and exterior

Subject and object.

That which witnesses, and that which is witnessed.

Esoterically we have described consciousness as masculine, and form/matter/experience as feminine.

At this level what is important to realise is we are NOT discussing human gender orientations. We are describing Kosmic forces using anthropomorphic terminology.

It would be absurd to consider that as a human being any one of us could ever be purely masculine (consciousness) or feminine (matter/experience).

It’s just not possible. Our very nature is an interplay of these two things. We have a body (feminine) that is inhabited by a consciousness (masculine). We have experiences (feminine) that are witnessed (masculine).

Nobody, at this level is pure masculine or feminine. It’s impossible. Forget about it.

So… we are, by our very nature, composed of masculine and feminine forces.

Let’s drop one step down.

—

Masculine and feminine as descriptors of qualities

There are more masculine oriented qualities:

– doing

– directive

– focused

– conceptual

– logical

– linear

– consistent

– stable

– competitive

– driven

– aggressive

– protective

– hard

– etc

There are more feminine oriented qualities:

– being

– flowing

– spontaneous

– radiant

– non-linear

– non-logical

– non-conceptual

– passionate

– expressive

– chaotic

– graceful

– sensual

– wrathful

– etc

I’m sure most of us can recognise that the first really do feel more masculine, and the second really do feel more feminine.

And whether we feel more oriented towards being masculine or feminine is going to determine what types of qualities we naturally tend to embody.

Yet if someone was composed only of masculine qualities, well can you consider what that would be like? Would such a person ever even care about something like sex, except for reproductive purposes? Would this person care about life other than to get stuff done? Would this person ever be able to relax, to enjoy anything?

Or if someone was composed only of feminine qualities… nothing would get done. It would be pure beingness, pure flow and emotion and sensuality. It would only be pleasure, and feeling, and life lived of the senses (sounds pretty lovely actually). Yet there would be no structure, no sense or direction to life.

These two beings, the pure masculine quality being (of which is still composed, at the Kosmic level, of a feminine too) and the pure feminine being (which cannot escape the fact that she is also composed of the masculine by virtue of having a consciousness) would have absolutely zero way of relating to each other.

It wouldn’t serve purpose (masculine orientation here, yes I’m using logic, and yes by virtue of you reading this technically you are engaging your masculine… don’t worry if you are a woman, that DOESN’T make you too masculine to experience love with a masculine man, that is utter nonsense) other than to try and experience a little bit of what the other has to offer… yet if it was pure, that would actually be of no interest, because there would be no space to understand or receive it.

And so, at this level we are also each composed of some unique combination of masculine and feminine qualities at different gradients.

Polarity doesn’t work like an on-off switch, that you are either directed or spontaneous. You could be say 80% directive and 20% spontaneous, generally… and then in different contexts that gradient shifts, like at a party you become 75% spontaneous 25% directive.

Everyone has their own personal sets of preferences and embodiments.

The thing to get here is that we ALL inhabit ALL of these qualities in some combination and gradient level.

Ok… so there is no pure masculine and feminine being here, either.

Lets drop down another level…

—

Masculine and feminine as gender orientation

This is, I believe, what the conversation is really about.

From a gender based orientation this polarity makes sense in terms of the energies of romance and sex.

Polarities function in relationship to each other, and it is a polarity that causes a holon (the functional unit of reality – essentially that which is simultaneously a ‘whole’ and a ‘part’. Like this essay is is whole and composed of paragraphs which are parts, which are whole and composed of the parts of sentences, which are whole and composed of the parts of words, which are whole and composed of the parts of letters… etc).

An atom is composed of a polarity of a positively charged nucleus (the proton) and a negatively charged electron.

The relationship between these two poles keeps the atom charged up and able to stay as a stable phenomena.

A relationship between a man and a woman, to remain both charged (romantically and sexually) and stable exists as a polarity between a masculine being and a feminine being.

Doesn’t actually matter who plays the more masculine being and who plays the feminine, just that there is one… otherwise the connection will be neutral in terms of the energy of romance and sex.

From a traditional perspective, the man must be the masculine and the woman must be the feminine.

We have a whole set of rules for each role, about which each must and must not do in order to maintain this polarity.

From a post-modern perspective, this breaks down as developmentally we start exploring a broader definition of what it means to be masculine or feminine. Men become more feminine and women become more masculine.

We see lots of this in the world. And IT IS a problem.

It is also a reaction to the problems inherent in the traditional perspective in which there was a generalised structural oppressive tendency in the masculine over the feminine.

It makes sense that we want to dismantle this oppressive tendency.

And it makes sense that the reaction went too far and we ended up with a culture of emasculated men and overly masculine (and increasingly burnt out) women and the nightmare of how to form functional relationships from this place.

And it makes sense that a reaction to this dysfunction would need to occur.

Yet HOW we react, is where it gets interesting.

Which is where we come back to men and dresses.

If we react to this polarity flip by regressing towards traditional values, we end up with a construct that says:

MEN CANNOT WEAR DRESSES, THAT IS FEMININE

WOMEN SHOULD NOT WEAR PANTS, THAT IS MASCULINE

Now, let’s investigate clothing from a view point of polarity.

Clothing selection from this place is oriented around, what purpose does it serve me in supporting my drive towards embodying my purpose in this world.

This is why men’s clothes has pockets and places to put shit.

Cos it’s functional.

The moment men’s clothing has anything to do with fashion or looking good, some of the feminine has leaked in.

Pure feminine perspective on clothing is entirely focused on expressing radiance. This is why women’s clothing accentuates form. This is why there are no pockets, and it’s why women wear these entirely impractical things like high heels.

There is no functional purpose whatsoever in the pure feminine expression clothing wise.

It’s a question of function vs aesthetics.

Masculine is functional.

Feminine is aesthetical.

Now does such a thing as pure masculine or pure feminine clothing exist?

Sort of… but also not really. Not on a day to day level where most of us exist.

Let’s now tie all of this together…

—

An integral perspective recognises all of these complex dynamics.

From an integral perspective we recognise that the notion of masculine and feminine, at all of these levels, are constructs.

That being said, the constructed nature of them doesn’t mean we try to get rid of them or neutralise them or do away with them (which is the toxicity we see in postmodernism, and it’s really truly fucked up).

That they are constructed doesn’t mean polarity doesn’t exist, it does. There is an absolute truth here.

It’s the INTERPRETATION and description that is constructed. Interpretation, and the process of distinction making, is just a tool useful to understand conceptually and then discarded once the wisdom is embodied.

An integrated perspective recognises that in order to become elegant, we master the use of these constructs as tools.

Polarity becomes something we play with, it becomes something we see in our awareness rather than who we are.

I no longer identify as masculine or feminine… I’m moving beyond that polarity AND from that place I choose to largely use mostly masculine qualities because they feel better to the biological organism that I inhabit.

In a romantic and sexual context, one being needs to be masculine… and usually I like being that one.

But sometimes not. Sometimes it’s nice to be more expressive, more in my feelings, more sensual. Sometimes it’s nice to receive pleasure.

I run the back end of my business in a more feminine way. It’s flowing and intuitive.

Yet I structure my courses in a very masculine way, ordered and coherent, sequential and contained.

The nature of the practices I teach, by virtue of being relational, are very feminine.

See… I’m all of it.

And it becomes choice.

So I might wear a dress, if I want to.

I might wear it to explore my sensuality (feminine orientation).

Or I might wear it to make a point (masculine orientation).

Nevertheless I mostly wear clothes that are practical, because I like them.

Not because I have to demonstrate my masculinity to the world.

It just makes more sense to how I choose to be in the world.

So the message is… do whatever you want, whatever is right for YOUR unique expression.

Be wary of dogma, of rigid constructs that determine how you should be.

Also be wary of the urge to try and deconstruct everything and reduce it to a flatland of neutrality.

Polarity is important.

And… if you want to evolve… the awareness of how you inhabit and choose to embody and express your polarity is important.

This is integrative consciousness.

And it’s where we need to go if we are ever going to make sense of the mess on planet earth in 2021.