The Feminine Structure as an Unstructured Structure
Feminine cognition does not run linear, it runs parallel, thinks of five aspects at the same time, jumps between topics — all things that are considered wrong and unprofessional in our society. But this can only be devalued by a mind that just cannot do this and is not capable of following this way of gaining knowledge. The linear logical reasoning and argumentation certainly has its justification, but it is only one side of the coin. My concern is to complement the masculine principle with the feminine principle in society.
Not many women in western societies are able to conduct research in a feminine way today. I have a friend who can do this and where I observe the pattern that such discussions of problems follow, because the feminine principle is by no means unstructured, as is often portrayed, but has an inherent logic that works by means of feeling. I once observed and analyzed our communication structure and would like to present it below.
When I talk to this friend, all the topics currently in the air always emerge at the beginning. That can be anywhere from three to five. During the conversation we add to these topics, from the point of view of the masculine principle: wildly mixed up. But it’s not wild, it’s guided by feeling and at some point the moment comes when everything that needs to be spoken about has been said and we find ourselves in a space of wholeness with the feeling that everything has been discussed at the moment and the solution(s) present itself. This kind of communication structure is impossible for most men (and many women today) to comprehend. Back when I wasn’t so aware of it, I used to talk to friends or other people like this – they would almost go insane and start judging me and telling me how to communicate “properly.” This feminine communication structure, however, by its “logic” enables a much deeper view of different problem scenarios, because it does not concentrate on one point and explore it in detail, but rather focuses on the references in their entirety.
The femine approach takes place via feelings, it is more a sensing and feeling, which is not objectively measurable, but one can intuitively feel it. Here it is important to be able to distinguish between the emotional ego-feeling and the feeling of the soul. There is often linguistic confusion here, because emotions and feelings are often used synonymously. We also say we feel emotions and we feel feelings. However, there is a big difference between the two. The ego structure stores our individual psychological aspects as well as the collective historical conditioning that we feel individually. However, an ego-feeling and a soul-feeling each feel different, that is, I can only learn to distinguish them by feeling or with a clear heart. The soul feeling is guided by truth, freedom, love, gratitude, joy. It vibrates subtly and unobtrusively, while emotions are usually dramatic and loud.
The Feminine Approach to the World
I start from the basic assumption that men and women are polarized differently and need to form the other pole. Men are more mind-oriented, women emotionally oriented. While in the traditional society, this polarity is by society, today it is our task to ensure that each gender forms the other pole and to harmonize the masculine and feminine principle with each other.
Understanding this is important insofar as the emphasis on qualities must not be confused with a backward-looking approach to traditional role concepts. The problem is that today women as well as men are supposed to train only the mind, the feeling and thus the feminine are often devalued as a whole. There are openings here like the call for the so-called “soft skills” or the appreciation for emotional intelligence, but it seems to me that the basic tenor is still strongly on the masculine principle. This does not happen as a conscious act. What I am describing here as a sociologist are the collective unconscious mechanisms that have developed through collective experience. It is also problematic in that while people have lofty ideals in their minds, their emotional development stops at the level of a narcissistic toddler or teenager.
This truncation of emotional life is outwardly exemplified by the growth of the cult of hair and body hair. Hair, on the head as on the body, is our subtle antennae. They are extended to ward off viruses, bacteria, etc., but also to sense whether people or situations are good for us.
Men today usually wear a short haircut. For women, long hair is acceptable, but it should be shaped with various shampoos, conditioners, hair sprays, hair gels, etc. to the “right” shape. And very important: the “right” hair color by means of the “right” chemicals. Women should also remove all their body hair, as it is considered unsightly. Even man is so conditioned that he feels disgust. In particular, all hair in the intimate area should be removed. No pubic hair, however, one has no pubic hair only as a child, which almost equals an infantilization or an adaptation of the body to the emotional underdevelopment. Since women have been forced by the market to carry out this complete body hair removal, it has also been considered beautiful and well-groomed for men to shave their armpits, pubic hair and chest hair or to remove them in another way until they too are “hairless beautiful.”
This example may sound to one or the other as “pulled by the hair,” he may feel disgust at the body hair. I myself also needed time to understand that the fine hairs on our body serve their purpose very well and our sensitivity can be reduced by these interventions as well. It is very interesting to follow one’s disgust and to feel deep inside oneself if the disgust is a true feeling or if it is socially and culturally shaped. I am convinced that there is genuine disgust, for example, when someone behaves inhumanely. In the same way, however, there are ideologically induced emotions of disgust.
However, the suppression of the feminine principle through the removal of hair finds expression not only in secular but also in spiritual traditions. Buddhist monks, for example, must shave off their hair, which is often justified by the fact that they have to curb their pride. This seems questionable to me, because a man with long hair would also have to lose his pride, as it does not correspond to the male fashion.
Therefore the question arises whether femininity was not also suppressed by it? This assumption is obvious, because the general Lotus Sitz aims to suppress the lower feminine chakras (emotions) and to direct the focus on the upper masculine chakras (intellect). Consequently, especially the masculine mental spiritual qualities were promoted.
One can divide even the different scientific disciplines into the feminine and masculine. In general, the natural sciences such as physics and chemistry work according to the masculine principle. Humanities like philosophy or sociology used to work according also to the feminine principle. Due to the predominance of the masculine principle and the accompanying compulsion for measurability and objectifiability those sciences working according to the feminine principle had to begin to meet these requirements and threw their true power and strength, similar to women in general, overboard.
They started to work by means of quantitative methods. In philosophy, this led to an elevation of analytic philosophy with special attention to logic, while the continental European tradition based on Socrates and Plato were marginalized.
In sociology, this led to empiricism, so that today sociology and statistics or empirical social research are almost synonymous. In psychology, too, the “soul” is measured by empirical findings. However, both disciplines draw their true power and cognitive strength from their qualitative-receptive mode of cognition, one could also call it in the words of Viktor Schauberger the “train principle”. Observing and perceiving, taking in and receiving are the characteristics that distinguish good qualitative epistemological work, also called hermeneutics. The (masculine) intellect, embedded at best in feeling, then knows how to interpret and render the observations appropriately, as well as to make connections and associations, and to put them into an appropriate form. The quality of the findings and interpretations is strongly related to the emotional healing of the researcher. Only when he is healed emotionally can he put things in order objectively; otherwise, there is a great danger of reacting emotionally to certain results.
There is hope, however, because the emerging quantum physics shows how vague and fluid the real world is, what is empirically measurable is only 5 %, everything else is of a spiritual nature and approaching this spirit adequately requires an integrated feminine approach.