Quote:
Originally Posted by Bitsy  So what is there to get offended at when I read Steve's article? Nothing. |
Just for the record, I'm not offended at Steve's article. I think he's wrong to equate people's biological gender with their dominant energetical mode. That's all.
Society subtly pressures people into using male energy as their dominant mode if they're men, and female energy if they're women. I don't think this is very efficient. For people who are already naturally functioning this way, it's not a problem, but for the others 1) it can be extremely disempowering and 2) why should they?
I just decided to rename those energies. Calling them "male" and "female" reinforces gender stereotypes I find limiting and don't agree with, so I chose other names for them. I'll call them "square energy" and "round energy". Maybe it's not very good words, but they translate what I feel when confronted to them.
I'm going to polarize square, then polarize round, and then try to keep both in balance, to find out what feels better for me.
In the past I was very unhappy not to be able to be a "real woman". I've tried to be more "feminine" but it didn't feel right at all. Then I accepted my "masculine" side and now I feel much, much better. Now I'm going to forget about man and woman and just concentrate on the energies. Looking forward to seeing what happens.