On The Feminine

How often do we subscribe qualities to a male or female that is considered masculine or feminine without giving pause? More often than I would care to find comfortable. I think that each individual is unique and to assign elements, gendered elements, per se, is presumptuous. As I mentioned in my last post on emotions and how we might keep ours under control in order to protect our heart, what of the person who transcends gendered roles? A quality of "opaqueness" of emotion, is traditionally, male. What about the female who is constantly opaque, without transparency in her feelings? In being a woman of masked emotion, she may stand in stark contrast to the females who express their sadness in tears or words, who express their anger or surprise in raised voices. What about the male who is easily angered, who pours out his heart by saying romantic, flowery things that mean something to him? Is he to be pitied just as the woman transgresses in 'masking'? We are so often confined by the role we were taught to be as a male or female that we are "judged" by others to be so, even if we are not.

I do not easily confess how I feel to others. My nature is to hold back. It was in my mother's nature, and is so in mine. She has difficulty even being hugged when she gets personally injured. Then often acts as if she feels no emotion by ignoring the issue. I am not so different. Yet, still, if I have a headache or a bad day, I can feel sad or irritated. On these days, the perception has been all too easy for one to say, "You are moody. You are emotional," as if this blanket judgment is an expectation one could have any day of the week. What is that? Why? Then again, when I don't show if I'm in love or if I am unclear about whether I want something or no, I am told I don't "live in the moment" or "give enough of myself", as if I should. Perhaps because I am a woman? As a female, we should be caring, loving, expressive...and if not, what are we? What am I?

All have emotions. I think it might be all too easy for a man to be judged, as well, for acting contrary to his nature. A man for being too expressive. A woman for not being. And what if all this jibber jabber about the growth of feminine and masculine qualities are merely mores of societal mythology intended to keep the patriarchal status quo. I object. <span style="font-weight:bold;">Something more to consider is below from an asian philosophical perspective: (below):



Is the Daode Jing a Feminist Text?

Laozi’s Daode Jing – the primary scripture of Taoism – promotes the cultivation of qualities such as receptivity, gentleness, and subtlety. In many western cultural contexts, these are qualities considered to be “feminine.” Even though most translations render the Chinese characters for “person” or “sage” as “man,” this has everything to do with the translations themselves, and little or nothing to do with the text itself. The original Chinese is always gender-neutral. One of the few places where the text assumes a distinctly gendered language is in verse six:

The Spirit of the valley never dies.
They call it wondrous female.
Through the portal of her mystery
Creation ever wells forth.

It lingers like gossamer and seems not to be
Yet when summoned, ever flows freely.

~ Laozi’s Daode Jing, verse 6 (translated by Douglas Allchin)