The ongoing attacks on masculinity and
attempts to identify a degenerate form of it, which civilised men have always
been the first to deplore, with the thing itself lead me to ask, what about
femininity? What has happened to that in recent decades? But first let me point
out that one of the aims of the demonic powers that are behind the corruption
of the modern world (and if you don't believe this then you really aren't
paying attention) is to gain greater control of a largely supine population who
will then behave in ways these powers desire. By and large, women are more
conformist than men who are the greater natural rebels against authority. Hence
the attempt to undermine masculinity and to tar it with the brush of unbalanced
behaviour. This is all about control and subservience.
I would like to respond to the silly
accusation that if you are against feminism, you don't respect women. For me,
the opposite is the case. It is that you do respect women as women but not as
the pseudo-men that feminism seeks to turn women into. Maybe it is the
feminist who doesn't respect women (or womanhood) and the anti-feminist (as
opposed to misogynist) who does? But, anyway, we have to ask ourselves what
really lies behind feminism because the current situation in the world is
deteriorating rapidly and will lead to eventual civilizational collapse,
melodramatic as that may sound. But that's the way it's always been when the
proper order of things is disturbed as it is now when everywhere natural ways
are being overturned. History clearly indicates that when women gain greater
influence in a culture, that culture declines. There are various reasons for
this, some of which I will go into below.
The answer to the question of what lies
behind feminism is, of course, as it usually is in these sorts of cases, ego.
Feminism is not really about equality as is claimed and popularly supposed.
That is just a front even if it may have been partly true 100 years ago. But
now that has changed into the attempt by the female to appropriate the male
role for herself for reasons of personal power. This is why feminism has arisen
at the time human beings have become more conscious of their will. That the
role feminists attempt to usurp is male is obvious to anyone whose mind is
clear and unprejudiced, but to have a clear mind you must not be blinded by
desire, ambition or resentment. To know truth, you must love truth above self.
If that is not the case, you will disguise your motives, even to yourself, in
fact, especially to yourself, and present vice as virtue.
It seems to be the case that feminism
appears in some form or another just after a culture has passed its peak, and
it increases in influence and appeal as that culture goes downhill. It is
probably both a symptom and a cause of this. This is just the opposite to what
is normally believed, that feminism is a product of a progressive, enlightened
society. But it is, in fact, a product of a society in decline that has lost
creative energy, turned its back on the culture creating heroic masculine and
lives off its past achievements. That is the only way it can afford the luxury
of feminism. A high technological standard is also important as that gives a
society the capability to indulge in ideological fantasies that in more
deprived times it simply would not be able to do.
But things are never as simple as we might
like them to be. Feminism is also a response to the increased need
for all human beings to develop and express themselves. That is its positive
side and the justification for it. But its negative side overweighs this now
although it tends to be obscured by excessive focus on its benefits.
It can be seen that men, in general, seek
excellence or truth whereas women, in general, seek consensus. This goes with
the common observation that a mother's love is unconditional while a father's
is more conditional. But when the feminine/maternal approach is adopted
towards work, philosophy and all the problems of existence, you have a tendency
towards decline because hard facts and reality are neglected in favour of what
makes people feel better. This ties in with the fact that it is the
expanding/male principle that drives evolution while the contracting/female
principle provides a stable environment in which that can take place. But you
need the former to be the directing principle to prevent stasis and allow for
growth and progress.
Modern feminism seeks to eradicate or deny
the differences between men and women and make of the two sexes just people.
But why are there men and women and not just people? It is because the two
sexes are meant to complement each other. And not just biologically or
reproductively. From a spiritual perspective, the differences are not simply
the result of evolution but go back to something in the nature of deity itself.
What that something is is best understood by contemplating the difference
between spirit and matter, and when we do this we see that the two are
complementary but not symmetrical which means that to introduce the idea of
equality, as we do nowadays, is misleading. There is no equality between men
and women. Are not women more beautiful than men? Are not men physically
stronger than women? Are not women more empathetic than men, and are there not
many more men represented at the higher levels of intelligence and creativity?
Equality in this context is a complete red herring.
The question in the title of this essay is
meant seriously. To be a lady in the true sense is an important spiritual
quality, just as to be a gentleman is. This is not a matter of a position in
society but a state of consciousness that is tuned to something greater and
more important than biological or intellectual realities. A real lady is a
woman who is aware of the deeper implications of the feminine archetype as it
exists on a spiritual level. This, by the way, has nothing to do with the
modern interest in the Goddess who is an outmoded pagan figure of no more
relevance than the pagan gods, none of whom are truly spiritual in that they
are projections of natural archetypes onto the spiritual plane rather
than genuinely spiritual archetypes. Consequently, they may benefit those
seeking to integrate a semi-spiritual existence with natural life but they
will not take you beyond the natural world to the truly spiritual. That
was never their function.
Rather than focus on an
archaic Goddess concept, women concerned with spiritual development
might be better off contemplating the archetype of the lady and trying
to coordinate their being with that. This will have an ennobling
and purifying effect and, to use what's become a
rather old-fashioned phrase, raise their vibrations.
Can a feminist be a lady? Not if she
remains a feminist which is a purely political identification. But if she
really wants to discover the reality of her womanhood in a deeper
sense then she must become a lady. By doing so she will gain power over men
(which, of course, is the feminist's dream) but it will be the power of truth,
goodness and nobility not crude domination. It will be the power of love and
sacrifice than which there is none greater.
If we credit the notion that we were once hermaphroditic to a deep ancestral memory, then our differentiation into male and female must be seen as a step toward individuation. This is how Rudolph Steiner presents it. Our personal identity grew alongside of our sexual identity. This is a complex issue. But it would seem that the paradox of gender fluidity, as it is now called, is that while it promotes the notion that we should be free to determine our gender, it also promotes the notion that all gender is irrelevant: male, female, gay, lesbian, transgender, etc - all are on a par. This is why the acronym keeps growing, e.g. from LGBT to LGBTQUIA and so forth. Inclusiveness eventually obliterates distinctions.But feminism is actually an idealization of male power and an attempt by women to wrest it from the hands of men. Female biology is seen as a hindrance to the exercise of traditional male roles, hence the feminist enthusiasm for contraception, abortion, lesbianism, etc. But it is the feminine in human nature that opens us to spirituality, which is why so much Biblical imagery portrays the human soul as a bride or a chaste wife; conversely, the soul turned away from God is a harlot or adulteress. If the feminine element in our culture hardens into a masculine mimicry, our distance from God, from realizing our true nature, grows ever greater. Then, power rather than love becomes the measure of fulfillment in life. I think this is what is happening. Heaven help us.
ReplyDeleteI think you have it just right, edwin. It is, as you say, the feminine in our nature that opens us up to God (God is masculine to all souls) and when the feminine is denied then the doorway to God is shut as it now seems to be.
ReplyDelete