|
For more information, contact: Gary Schouborg, PhD (925) 932-1982 |
Schouborg, Gary (1992). "Real Men, Real Women". The Quest, Summer, 5-6. Real Men, Real Women Gary Schouborg For the sake of clarity and
reality, let's cut immediately to the chase. A man is someone who wants to
have a penis. If he doesn't have one, he is a physically deformed man, but a
real man nonetheless. If he happens to have a vagina, he's a man in a woman's
body. The obverse is true for the opposite sex (not
"gender": I'm talking here about human, not grammatical entities).
A woman is someone who wants to have a vagina. If she doesn't have one, she
is a physically deformed woman, but a real woman nonetheless. If she happens
to have a penis, she is a woman in a man's body. That's it. Now that we all
understand what a real man and a real woman is, we can proceed
to other issues, like: What do individual men want for themselves? What do
they want from other men? What do they want from women? And what do
individual women want for themselves? From other women? From men? My point is this. Let's
stop pontificating about what men and women should be and non-judgmentally
explore what they want. If Robert Bly and his fans want to go into the woods
and beat drums, fine. But don't buy into their blather about becoming real
men. Some men, and some women for that matter, may find such activities
enjoyable, even therapeutic and fulfilling. Those who don't are not lesser
men and women. Those who do are not becoming more masculine or feminine. They
may be foolishly seeking approval and will eventually correct their mistake.
Or they may be getting in touch with impulses deep within themselves that
will make their lives more satisfying for themselves and for others. But not
necessarily more satisfying for everyone. To some, they may be a pain in the
ass. That fact is not a strike against either the painers
or the pained. Of course, each of us in different
degrees wants to please others. It's understandable and legitimate to try to
meet the expectations that others have of men and women, so that we can be
sexually, personally, and financially successful. But let's not internalize
those expectations. Let's understand them in reference to what we want and
need for ourselves. Only then can we reach out for approval realistically and
without betraying ourselves. What I am seeking is
clarity. I don't care what Ken Wilber and Wendy Alter see as their masculine
and feminine sides. I do care, and am grateful for, their articulation of
what they find satisfying in their lives. Who cares if some of what gratifies
each of them overlaps and some is distinctive? What have we gained by
labeling part of those things masculine and part feminine? If I identify more
with what Wendy finds satisfying, do I have to worry that I am too feminine?
Is there some proportion of masculine and feminine required of me as a man?
Who requires it? If Ken Wilber seeks to be more whole, is it because he is
too masculine? Or too feminine? Or is it because he is a human being with yet
more possibilities to realize? I am not trying to wash
away differences, only trying to explain their nature. I have much to learn
from others, both men and women. I have learned to be more assertive from
both male and female models. I have learned to be sensitive from both male
and female models. In my experience, thinking of these models as Men and
Women only encourages me to think stereotypically. But thinking of them as
individuals helps me pay much closer attention to what each concretely has to
offer. Certainly, generalizations are possible and legitimate. As individual
men and women break out of the bondage of ossified social expectation and
explore what they really want, traditional generalizations are losing their
credibility and we are seeking new ones. My concern is that the desire for
generalization often carries with it normative assumptions about what
men and women should be, about who is a real man and a real
woman. The problem with normative
assumptions is that they disguise personal demands as objective judgments.
Sure, go ahead and prefer certain characteristics in men and others in women.
That is your privilege. But acknowledge that as your preference, not as your
insight into how people ought to be. To the degree that you can do
that, you will liberate both yourself and others from the tyranny of
unrecognized demands. Instead, you can explore what you want for yourself and
from others, and deal with them forthrightly in those terms. The world of desire is a
much larger and richer one than the one of normative expectation. Though the
latter often initiates my quest for a truly satisfying life, the former is
the door I must enter to follow that quest to the very end. Thus, if I am
feeling troubled or unfulfilled, I may begin by following other people's
advice as to what I should do or what I ought to be. Insofar as what they
tell me is a reflection, albeit indirect and garbled, of what makes their own
lives satisfying, and insofar as I am like them in that way, I will take a
few steps down the path of what is satisfying and fulfilling for me. I will
not have gone too far, however, until I experience dissatisfaction with their
advice. I will have to explore my own desires, my own self, on my own. At
that point, the mystery that I am (and correlatively, the mystery that others
are) will open up to me in all its unrestrictedness.
It is the anxiety of facing this open-ended mystery that too often seduces me
into seeking an illusory comfort within the confines of normative
expectation. |
