I’m wondering how to reconcile the ideas in these two posts, or if that is possible, or even wise? First this:
What I call here “the Goddess” is also known as the divine Feminine that lives within us all– men and women. There is no self-blame here, only a sense of what we must unlearn if we are to embody the sacred marriage of the Feminine and the Masculine in ourselves and in our communities. […]
A culture based on a principle of power-over does not encourage men or women to know the deep power and beauty of what we are. We are all, beginning again and again, the long walk home together.
And this, attributed to brilliant radical feminist author Lierre Keith:
Masculinity is simply a conglomeration of the personality traits necessary for the patriarchal soldier-rapist: physically strong, emotionally cauterized, rational, domineering, cruel. All of this is supposed to add up to “handsome” as well. Likewise femininity is ultimately a description of the personality that results from trauma and powerlessness: weak, passive, yielding, emotional, hyper-vigilant to the needs of the dominators and desperate for the dominator’s attention.
I’m wondering, really, if there is a purpose to ‘divine femininity’ or if it doesn’t just reinforce what Lierre describes as femininity, for women.
And yet, what would happen if the word ‘feminine’ were replaced with ‘female’ — the divine female, the Goddess?
In that all marginalized groups are reduced (washed) to fitting in with the elites (white-washing, male-washing, het-washing, middle- or upper-class-washing, etc.), and wherein the problem is that each marginalized groups holds necessary truths and often unspeakable beauty and beneficience, would dismissing the divine female not normalize maleness at a great cost to we females?
And I’m wondering if it is possible within radical feminism to acknowledge the presence, however viewed, of both male and female humans, without ever over-valuing males (or making marriage mandatorily heterosexual!), while also acknowledging the further marginalization of some males compared with some females, and the fact that this marginalization — often deadly, even genocidal — is also shared by females? The divinity focus tends to forget the oppression of females, of power difference inherent in the sex hierarchy, just as it conflates sex and gender: sex is male or female, and very rarely intersex, while gender, masculine or feminine, is a social construct (is FAKE) enacted in the manner Lierre describes. And yet there are males I know who work hard to use their privilege to re-empower females and to educate or block hostile males, guarding feminist spaces. I know for certain that I am, and other sisters are, better off for their efforts.
NOTE: Please don’t use any form of the word ‘intersection’ here — ivory-tower words coined by tokens who know not their own herstory are unwelcome.