Desireless Sex

[Nick_A]

Netti

Yes, there are many ways of dealing with the "divine androgen split."

Here is another way from the Gospel of Thomas:

(114) Simon Peter said to him, "Let Mary leave us, for women are not worthy of life."
Jesus said, "I myself shall lead her in order to make her male, so that she too may become a living spirit resembling you males. For every woman who will make herself male will enter the kingdom of heaven."

 

[Netti-Netti]

Exaggerated versions of opposite sex behavior (like cross-dressing) indicate a lack of emotional integration. The overt acting out may serve the purpose of creating a smoke screen to help the individual avoid doing the inner work.

I wanted to add: Crossdressing might be a way of trying out a feminine role. The obvious mistake the crossdresser is making: objectifying psychological values and equating femininity with superficial social aspects like attire.

Men supposedly become more relationship oriented as they get older. The reverse development obtains for women. Women first have an anima career (marriage and children), then switch gears and try to develop a tougher aspect in the second half of life, like working as a chimney sweep, being a bossy manager, or they go into politics.

 

[seattlegal]

I wanted to add: Crossdressing might be a way of trying out a feminine role. The obvious mistake the crossdresser is making: objectifying psychological values and equating femininity with superficial social aspects like attire.

Men supposedly become more relationship oriented as they get older. The reverse development obtains for women. Women first have an anima career (marriage and children), then switch gears and try to develop a tougher aspect in the second half of life, like working as a chimney sweep, being a bossy manager, or they go into politics.

As the animus is partial to argument, he can best be seen at work in disputes where both parties know they are right. Men can argue in a very womanish way, too, when they are anima - possessed and have thus been transformed into the animus of their own anima.​

[SIZE=-2]Aion (1951). CW 9, Part II: P.29
[/SIZE]​

[SIZE=-2]
[/SIZE]

 

[seattlegal]

Here's a related thread (quiz) for the psychological anima/animus integration aspect of this thread:
http://www.interfaith.org/forum/how-masculine-or-feminine-are-8481-8.html

According to the test, I'm 46% masculine and 54% feminine. (Would that be 46% gentleman and 54% lady or 46% a**hole and 54% b*tch?)

 

[Netti-Netti]

As the animus is partial to argument, he can best be seen at work in disputes where both parties know they are right. Men can argue in a very womanish way, too, when they are anima - possessed and have thus been transformed into the animus of their own anima.​

[SIZE=-2]Aion (1951). CW 9, Part II: P.29
[/SIZE]​

[SIZE=-2]
[/SIZE]

Heh, this has been attributed to Jung as well:

"...the vanity of some girly men is much preferred to the ideological grandstanding of women who are always prepared to draw the sword of power."
​

​

Here's a related thread (quiz) for the psychological anima/animus integration aspect of this thread:
http://www.interfaith.org/forum/how-masculine-or-feminine-are-8481-8.html

According to the test, I'm 46% masculine and 54% feminine. (Would that be 46% gentleman and 54% lady or 46% a**hole and 54% b*tch?)

The self-description may very well be accurate. However the test's dualistic profiling approach don't make much sense. A fully functioning person would personify the sacred androgen, thus reflecting a complete reintegration of the male and female aspect. The fully functioning person would be 100% and 100% female.

 

[Tao_Equus]

(Would that be 46% gentleman and 54% lady or 46% a**hole and 54% b*tch?)

lol....please tell

 

[seattlegal]

Heh, this has been attributed to Jung as well:

"...the vanity of some girly men is much preferred to the ideological grandstanding of women who are always prepared to draw the sword of power."
​

​

Better known as a castration knife?

Rudyard Kipling--The Female of the Species

The self-description may very well be accurate. However the test's dualistic profiling approach don't make much sense. A fully functioning person would personify the sacred androgen, thus reflecting a complete reintegration of the male and female aspect.

OK, are you fully functioning, given your next line? {I just couldn't resist!}

The fully functioning person would be 100% and 100% female.

Hehehe! {Who needs a castration knife when the men will cut the male out themselves? }

 

[Netti-Netti]

Better known as a castration knife?

Rudyard Kipling--The Female of the Species

It has a nice rhyme to it. But it's more a description of a animus-possessed woman than anything else.

Who needs a castration knife when the men will cut the male out themselves?

Some women do resent the maternal role.

My hunch is is that recognition of the feminine side in a man is less of an issue for a woman who is (1) comfortable and respectful of her own feminine side - including her ability to contribute as a spiritual guide - and (2) does not blindly identify with the animus and can therefore draw upon that energy for insight and transformation.

 

[seattlegal]

It has a nice rhyme to it. But it's more a description of a animus-possessed woman than anything else.

That's why I posted it--to balance out Jung's earlier example of an anima possessed man.

Some women do resent the maternal role.

My hunch is is that recognition of the feminine side in a man is less of an issue for a woman who is (1) comfortable and respectful of her own feminine side - including her ability to contribute as a spiritual guide - and (2) does not blindly identify with the animus and can therefore draw upon that energy for insight and transformation.

Are you kidding? The feminine side of a man is no problem for women--unless the man's feminine side is a b*tch.

As for women not identifying blindly with their animus--the education of women, especially in logical thinking, can go a long way towards preventing that from happening. Being able to reason things out--and not having that be 'unseemly' for a woman, is a good thing, imo.

 

[Netti-Netti]

The feminine side of a man is no problem for women--unless the man's feminine side is a b*tch.

Do you mean unless the woman perceives the man's feminine side to be a b*tch?

Whether or not the man's feminine side is problematic would largely depend on the woman's response to it. In fact, the b*tch aspect might develop in reaction to the woman's rejecting attitude, and may actually be more an aggressive animus trait.

I expect marital problems for a marriage in which the 'girly man' is perceived as ineffectual by a woman who prizes her own masculine side over her feminine side. Which would explain why she would prefer a macho kind of guy and will blame herself endlessly for having picked a sensitive guy.

A Jungian approach to marital therapy would deal with the psychological incompatibilities that emanate from the mismatched values and confusion about how to behave. For one thing, a woman who feels like she needs to express personal autonomy and competence could discover that trouncing someone isn't the only option for that within the interpersonal realm.

 

[seattlegal]

Do you mean unless the woman perceives the man's feminine side to be a b*tch?

Point made.

Whether or not the man's feminine side is problematic would largely depend on the woman's response to it. In fact, the b*tch aspect might develop in reaction to the woman's rejecting attitude, and may actually be more an aggressive animus trait.

I think that was mentioned in post #43

I expect marital problems for a marriage in which the 'girly man' is perceived as ineffectual by a woman who prizes her own masculine side over her feminine side. Which would explain why she would prefer a macho kind of guy and will blame herself endlessly for having picked a sensitive guy.

It would probably depend upon whether or not the so-called 'girly man' preferred wishful thinking over logical thinking, in such a case. A macho kind of guy can also be just as prone to wishful thinking over logical thinking. Wishful thinking, without the logic to back it up, may be full of good intentions, but could yield unskillful results, possibly leading to psychological abuse from the wishful thinking 'girly man,' or physical abuse from a wishful thinking 'macho man.'

A Jungian approach to marital therapy would deal with the psychological incompatibilities that emanate from the mismatched values and confusion about how to behave. For one thing, a woman who feels like she needs to express personal autonomy and competence could discover that trouncing someone isn't the only option for that within the interpersonal realm.

There you go thinking logically. **Puts zen stick away.**

 

[Netti-Netti]

I think that was mentioned in post #43

Nice work SG, but there is no mention in post #43 of the woman's role in creating the conditions that reinforce the male's b*tchin' argumentation style.

Wishful thinking, without the logic to back it up, may be full of good intentions, but could yield unskillful results....

Of course the woman may have been prone to wishful thinking herself from the start, thinking the partnership could combine all positive traits. She could have a part in the resultant unskillful results in other ways as well.

There you go thinking logically.

SiLLy Me !

 

[seattlegal]

Whether or not the man's feminine side is problematic would largely depend on the woman's response to it. In fact, the b*tch aspect might develop in reaction to the woman's rejecting attitude, and may actually be more an aggressive animus trait.

Of course the woman may have been prone to wishful thinking herself from the start, thinking the partnership could combine all positive traits. She could have a part in the resultant unskillful results in other ways as well.

Hmm, rejecting attitude, or wishful thinking? Both?

Nice work SG, but there is no mention in post #43 of the woman's role in creating the conditions that reinforce the male's b*tchin' argumentation style.

The quote was about animus and how animus likes to argue, {especially if both parties know they are right.} In both men and women. The obvious way to diffuse this situation is for both parties to recognize there is a possibility they might be wrong.
(btw, the quote was regarding how an anima-possessed man can become his own anima's animus. You were right to point out that it did not mention how the man became anima-possessed. Did the woman somehow cause the man to become anima-possessed? It might be worth further exploration.)

Animus is good for poking holes in theories. If one recognizes the possibility one might be wrong, animus can quite useful in perfecting theories--paralleling how the scientific method is supposed to work. However, this can be quite difficult where humility is lacking.

SiLLy Me !

{btw, I'm still trying to decide between 46% gentleman and 54% lady, or 46% a**hole and 54% b*tch. Maybe I might be able to come up with some sort of measuring scale from the data in this thread.}

 

[Netti-Netti]

Hmm, rejecting attitude, or wishful thinking? Both?

Sure, both. There is no reason to try to change someone if you accept them as they are.

The quote was about animus and how animus likes to argue.... (btw, the quote was regarding how an anima-possessed man can become his own anima's animus.

Here's my reading of it: Jung said "the animus is partial to argument..." Yes, but the irrationality of animus opinions is evident principally in a woman's expression of animus - which is why Jung goes on to talk about "men who argue in a very womanish way."

Elsehere Jung has talked about unintegrated animus among women as being indicated by women's irrational stubborness, their dogmatic and unreasoned opinionations, their willingness to uncritically accept standard male views based on the assumption that claims become true if argued aggressively, the tendency to boldly discount opposing views, etc.

Jung doesn't talk about animus in isolation. He talks about how it gets expressed in women and in men who seem to act out in the irrational/unconscious ways.

As for women not identifying blindly with their animus--the education of women, especially in logical thinking, can go a long way towards preventing that from happening.

True, reasoning and logical thinking are associated with the animus. These would be positive and constructive expressions. However, according to Jung a woman's animus is not so much actual competencies as the lopsided, unintegrated psychological values contained in the so-called "masculine imprint" (read unconscious mind). It's basically a composite of unconscious ideas and motivations that tends to influence behavior in uncanny ways unless the imprint is recognized. Animus imagery in the woman's psyche is totally different from what it is in the male's psyche, and this is arguably a source of communication problems between the sexes.

Did the woman somehow cause the man to become anima-possessed?

Probably not. But the woman can episodically reinforce the behavior - consciously or unconsciously and create an ambiance of emotional upheaval and mental confusion.

It might be worth further exploration.

Go for it.

 

[17th Angel]

Kidding aside if that actually is the case it might be good to remind you of what they say about people who live in glass houses.

That they get a nice tan? Or.... They grow the best weed? No wait! Is it they don't use the toilet often? No! It's 13 ghosts, isn't it? People in glass houses have 13 ghosts in the basement? Dunno... What do they say? That they can't practice desireless sex?

 

[seattlegal]

My hunch is is that recognition of the feminine side in a man is less of an issue for a woman who is (1) comfortable and respectful of her own feminine side - including her ability to contribute as a spiritual guide - and (2) does not blindly identify with the animus and can therefore draw upon that energy for insight and transformation.

OK, so far I've made an analogy of going from driving an automatic transmission to driving a manual transmission, learning where the different gears are, and the best time to shift into the next gear. This is what I've tested out so far: (please feel free to punch any holes in this theory)

• First gear--The athlete
  
  Also referred to as the thug or the muscleman, Jung described it as the embodiment of physical power.
  This would be the one wielding the zen stick to guard against unreasoning and/or animalistic behavior. It's safe to shift up to the next gear when logical reasoning dialog is established.
  
• Second gear--The planner
  
  This stage embodies the capacity for independence, planned action, and initiative.
  This would be the theoretical thinker. He can get bogged down by being too set in his ways, possibly out of pride. It's safe to shift up to the next gear when intellectual humility and flexibility is reached by understanding that there might be other ways of looking at and accomplishing things. (Plans need to be flexible.)
  
• Third gear-- The professor
  
  Also referred to as the cleric, it embodies "the Word."
  
  Teaching and learning, problem solving--being able to accurately describe and express processes and possible solutions, and being able to put them into practice. I would guess recognizing and acknowledging the limits in this mode, and recognizing the need for inspiration and guidance would be needed before shifting into fourth gear.
  
• Fourth gear--The guide
  
  Like "Sofia," this is highest level of mediation between the unconscious and conscious mind.
  
  Where are we driving to anyway? (Hopefully not over a cliff! )

Sure, both. There is no reason to try to change someone if you accept them as they are.

Here's my reading of it: Jung said "the animus is partial to argument..." Yes, but the irrationality of animus opinions is evident principally in a woman's expression of animus - which is why Jung goes on to talk about "men who argue in a very womanish way."

Elsehere Jung has talked about unintegrated animus among women as being indicated by women's irrational stubborness, their dogmatic and unreasoned opinionations, their willingness to uncritically accept standard male views based on the assumption that claims become true if argued aggressively, the tendency to boldly discount opposing views, etc.

Uncritically accepting standard male views? (ROFL!)

Jung doesn't talk about animus in isolation. He talks about how it gets expressed in women and in men who seem to act out in the irrational/unconscious ways.

Raising consciousness can sometimes be difficult, sometimes easy.

True, reasoning and logical thinking are associated with the animus. These would be positive and constructive expressions. However, according to Jung a woman's animus is not so much actual competencies as the lopsided, unintegrated psychological values contained in the so-called "masculine imprint" (read unconscious mind). It's basically a composite of unconscious ideas and motivations that tends to influence behavior in uncanny ways unless the imprint is recognized. Animus imagery in the woman's psyche is totally different from what it is in the male's psyche, and this is arguably a source of communication problems between the sexes.

OK, I admit that I might be 'lop sided' in that I might rap out first gear a bit much before shifting into second gear.

Probably not. But the woman can episodically reinforce the behavior - consciously or unconsciously and create an ambiance of emotional upheaval and mental confusion.


Go for it.

Need more data and feedback first.

 

[Netti-Netti]

OK, so far I've made an analogy of going from driving an automatic transmission to driving a manual transmission, learning where the different gears are, and the best time to shift into the next gear.

• First gear--The athlete
  
  Also referred to as the thug or the muscleman, Jung described it as the embodiment of physical power.
  This would be the one wielding the zen stick to guard against unreasoning and/or animalistic behavior. It's safe to shift up to the next gear when logical reasoning dialog is established.
• Second gear--The planner
  
  This stage embodies the capacity for independence, planned action, and initiative.
  This would be the theoretical thinker. He can get bogged down by being too set in his ways, possibly out of pride. It's safe to shift up to the next gear when intellectual humility and flexibility is reached by understanding that there might be other ways of looking at and accomplishing things. (Plans need to be flexible.)
• Third gear-- The professor
  
  Also referred to as the cleric, it embodies "the Word."
  
  Teaching and learning, problem solving--being able to accurately describe and express processes and possible solutions, and being able to put them into practice. I would guess recognizing and acknowledging the limits in this mode, and recognizing the need for inspiration and guidance would be needed before shifting into fourth gear.
• Fourth gear--The guide
  
  Like "Sofia," this is highest level of mediation between the unconscious and conscious mind.
  
  Where are we driving to anyway? (Hopefully not over a cliff! )

Not sure the developmental gradations of progress are quite so sharp in real life, but this is clear.

Uncritically accepting standard male views? (ROFL!)

In retrospect, this might actually be a major insight. I didn't realize it till now.

It actually makes good sense in light of our previous thoughts on tough guy versus girly man as a choice of partner: a woman may select a sensitive guy because she fears getting constricted by patriarchal hierarchy/authoritarianism and the related S&M modalities. The sensitive guy would be less likely to enforce any such constriction on the woman's expressive freedom because he does not live out of an authoritarian view of the world.

Relevance: concern about losing freedom - i.e., being deprived of freedom by it a dominant male figure. Selecting a sensitive guy is one possible solution. But there's yet another possible way to adapt to a fear of male aggression/imposition of control.

Women are faced with achieving their self interest through though unequal partnerships with aggressive male figures who don't respect women's freedom and potential and often take women for granted. So what's another solution? ... How about becoming one of those aggressive male figures, or maybe at least become enough like one to give the impression of not respecting the feminine principle?.....

Btw sexism is correlated with authoritarianism, so I would expect women who buy into male authoritarian imagery to devalue being a woman. In this connection, authoritarian women have been found to be be more accepting of rape myths, an acceptance that has been found to involve three factors: (a) sex role stereotyping, (b) adversarial sexual beliefs, and (c) acceptance of interpersonal violence. These kind of self-rejecting attitudes are completely at odds with women's self-interest.

My reaction is that perhaps we explain these kinds of attitudes as the internalized aspect of a authoritarian male view of women - an instance of uncritically accepting standard male views. Only women who are terribly insecure and self-rejecting would buy into such attitudes.

Here's link to the study: http://www.webster.edu/~hulsizer/research/KoestererHoffman.pdf

 

[Tao_Equus]

I recently read a synopsis of several studies on this subject. I believe it was in New Scientist if you are interested in hunting it down,

The results showed the following: For partners women select more effeminate guys with higher squeaky voices as life long partners. And deep voiced masculine types for opportunist procreation. A woman is far more likely to look for, (in fact many actively hunt), the second type after having a first child with the squeaky voiced husband. The reasons cited for that are that women seek genetic variability to maximise fitness in their offspring. All unconsciously of course.


tao

 

[seattlegal]

Well, if you really examine it, the craving of power for the sake of power is not really conducive to freedom.

 

[seattlegal]

Did the woman somehow cause the man to become anima-possessed?

Probably not. But the woman can episodically reinforce the behavior - consciously or unconsciously and create an ambiance of emotional upheaval and mental confusion.

It might be worth further exploration.

Go for it.

Jung's model would probably attribute this to the Shadow of one or both individuals involved.