Oppressors and Rebels

In my opinion there are few areas more confused these days than the relationship between the sexes even though, ironically enough, many people seem to think it is on a better footing now than ever. In some ways, it is but in others, more fundamental perhaps because based in the metaphysical origins of being, no. I believe we can get a fuller understanding of what men and women are and what they ought to be to each other by seeing what each accuses the other of when they are pointing to their respective faults. By looking at the quality of which the fault is a distortion we have an indication as to what the reality of the relationship should be when it is in good order. The thing gone wrong points to the right thing just as ugliness points to beauty or violence to strength.

What do feminists say about what they term the patriarchy, a word that almost always has derogatory undertones to it now but simply refers to male authority? They say it is oppressive. And what do traditionalist men say about feminists, a word that in liberal circles has a strong implication of something that is right and proper but is actually, using its own terminology, inherently sexist? They say they are rebels against natural or even divine order.

Now, oppression is the abuse of power or authority. It is taking a natural thing beyond its natural boundary.  By the same token, rebellion is the attempt by one class to seize power from another. This may in certain circumstances be justifiable but often it is not and if you look back to the first rebellion, the one which set the pattern for subsequent ones, you see Satan rebelled against God because he could not accept the natural order and hierarchy. For in both cases, oppression and rebellion, it is very frequently ego, self-will and desire for power that are the motivating factors. Feminists may say they rebel because women are oppressed but that does not alter the basic dynamic that it is men who are seen as the oppressors and feminists as the rebels. I submit this does point to something real that exists beyond current behaviour.

I write on this subject quite often because it does seem to me that the broken relationship between men and women is one of the chief causes of the spiritual devastation in the world. It is the foremost example of how we have abandoned truth and the natural way of being for ideology based on atheistic materialism. Feminism, one cause of the breakdown, is a spiritual disorder because it is an instance of one part of a complementary duality seeking to usurp the prerogatives of the other, at the same time failing to observe its own duties and responsibilities. Of course, there is more to it than that and elements of feminism are justified. Nevertheless the overall effect is harmful and getting increasingly so as each generation wants more in the way of equality or what they call equality, assuming that to be a fundamental truth or right that nobody could argue with. You have exactly the same process at work with matter and spirit. In any sane world these two would be seen as complementary principles with life as the relationship between them. They would not be equals because they are different but both would be seen as essential to the whole even if one is more primary than the other.

Perhaps the most obvious way in which feminism shows itself to be a disorder is that it destroys families which, for most normal, properly adjusted people, are fundamental to happiness and fulfilment. Then it disrupts any real loving relationship between men and women who become rivals rather than helpmates. The relationship between the sexes is reduced to power rather than love, and competition instead of cooperation. Feminists point to male oppression of the past, which existed though not necessarily to the degree maintained. But to seek to overturn the whole order because elements of it have been abused is the mark of wreckers not builders.

It didn't strike me at the time but the Masters who spoke to me were decidedly patriarchal in their manner. That is, they exuded authority though this was combined with great love. There was no question of any kind of equality, and even they spoke of higher Masters pointing to the hierarchy in heaven. On the very rare occasions I was spoken to by a female spirit, only one of which occurred during the period covered by my book Meeting the Masters though there were a few more later on that I had forgotten about until writing the book brought back memories, the atmosphere and tone were completely different. There was a delicacy, refinement, purity and boundless compassion that were truly feminine in the best sense and which show contemporary feminist demands for equality to be shallow and self-centred. These beings were 'feminine-ist' not feminist. They had brought the archetypal spiritual quality of receptivity, archetypal because without it there could be no creation as the will of God could not be expressed, to a high peak, one that manifested in wonderfully deep gentleness, love and wisdom. When the Masters spoke I was awed and humbled (in varying degrees, not all were the same), but when these female spirits spoke my heart melted.

There is no doubt that the attempt to establish a greater harmonious balance between the masculine and the feminine at the beginning of the 19th century was necessary. The balance had tipped too far onto one side. Unfortunately the 20th century saw this attempt captured by forces that sought power rather than truth and we have reached a situation now that is worse than the one we tried to redress with real femininity even more ignored than it was back then though women may have more power and influence. But power and influence to do what? Not to pursue their dharma, a useful Sanskrit word that has no real English equivalent but includes such meanings as truth, law, cosmic order and life purpose so following or obeying your dharma would be coordinating yourself to your proper divine pattern.

A comment by Andrew on my last post mentioned the book of Genesis and spoke of the profound mystery embedded in the creation of Adam and Eve with Eve emerging from Adam as though different parts of the whole were being separated so they could eventually unite again in full consciousness through free choice. In other words, love. The deepest love is between complements that fulfil each other not between equals that are the same as each other. This story in Genesis is indeed a profound truth and one humanity urgently needs to rediscover.