By Maria Padhila
It’s what Isaac refers to as “outkicking your coverage.” It means aiming a little high for a partner, usually in terms of appearance.
I’ve also heard “fighting above your weight,” as in boxing. Just recently, I was watching an old episode of the HBO show Treme, about New Orleans, and the young chef (now paired with a handsome sous chef), runs into her old DJ boyfriend at Jazzfest. He’s with a gorgeous musician, and she says, half-joking: “You’re fighting above your weight, there.” He replies: “I always have.” Meaning: You, too, were too good for me.
Oh, my! This is how those of us who consistently outkick our coverage get away with it: charm, flattery, a measure of humility (that only comes from confidence), and just damn sincere appreciation for those we admire.
It’s telling that the metaphors come from sports, because as much as those idiot pickup artist types have tainted the term, love and romance has plenty of aspects of a game. You can play it like the pickup “artists” or like the warriors in Dangerous Liaisons, where the prize is not the love or pleasure itself but social status, economic benefit, or the winning of a prize “object” one believes will convey such status or meaning to one’s existence.
Or you can, as Ram Dass says, “do it as if it’s all part of the dance.” Just play.
I have to remind myself of that a great deal when it comes to my guys and my friends, who are beyond my coverage and only getting more so as I age. The other night I went with Chris to what shaped up as an oddly competitive swinger Meet and Greet. He was, as usual, the handsomest man in the room, a room filled with ladies in sheaths and stilettos.
I was jealous of every inch of skin I saw. For at least five winters now, I’ve suffered from a combination of allergies, dryness, and nerve problems that turns the skin on my arms and sometimes on other patches of my body into an itching, tingling, scratched and scarred mess of torture. I know, it sounds so exaggerated, but it’s true — Big Brother would only have to put me in a room full of mosquitoes and I’d be selling out everyone in no time; itching is my nemesis. Right now, all the dust and detergents and solvents from the home repairs aren’t helping matters much.
So I’m essentially feeling like an old lady in a mu-mu at the swinger cocktail party in an elegant hotel bar.
Like I should have brought my knitting basket and taken the role of the gossipy chaperone sitting in the corner.
It was a tremendous opportunity to experiment and meditate on phenomena including female display, competition, rejection and the power of the gaze. Venus in Capricorn is offering many such opportunities to look at the “work” of relationships, their strategies and tactics, the value of patience, the value in what is hard-won. These are all Capricorn values; I have a sense of them within me (Jupiter-Saturn conjunction in Capricorn) but being with Chris and another heavily Capricorn man before him brings out an appreciation for them. I’m a flitter; I get bored easily. I see them sticking with things, taking so many pains, and I get frustrated and impatient. But if I wait with it for a little while, I realize how much their taking pains benefits me and others. I’m bent on using this time to do some of this myself.
Another Venus in Capricorn lesson is this chestnut used on the less-lovely everywhere, one that is absolutely true: when you look less than lovely, you know for sure that people love you for something other than just your looks. I was watching Chris doing painstakingly careful paintwork on our little second bathroom the other night, turning it into a glamorous mini-spa for my princess daughter, and thinking just that.
(Another thing I’ve noticed about Capricorns: they are very good at repair jobs. Whether it’s healthy or not, they like to scavenge for the dusty or dinged. In relationships, it looks like they’re fighting below their weight. But the joke is on everyone else, who had underestimated their partner’s charms.)
Anyway, the very next morning, Eric Francis opened up a big can of Facebook whup-ass about “the male gaze.” Nothing would make me happier than to have this discussion extended here, so lay it down!
While there were dozens of branches to the stream, the one I can look at briefly is the question of why would a woman get all dressed up beautifully — or “tantalizingly,” as Eric put it — and then get mad about being looked at?
Right now, I can see in my mind’s gaze my copy of John Berger’s Ways of Seeing, a primer on gaze in art. I can see the volumes on Hitchcock and Welles, the feminist film criticism anthologies and magazines, the graphic novels and literary criticism, and somewhere in there is Joanna Russ’s How to Suppress Women’s Writing —
but I can’t get at any of it, because it’s all in boxes. So you’ll have to supply the feminist theory in the comments, and what I’ll share is what came to me out of my less-lovely party experience:
I was seeing many women who wanted to be looked at, but not necessarily looked at by me. I even complimented a few, and those compliments were either accepted and led to a conversation, or were deflected. I let myself explore the feelings a less-lovely person might have in such an encounter, man or woman.
I felt rejected or unwelcome once or twice. Once, I thought: “Wow, she’s pretty happy with herself. She must think she’s pretty great. I bet she’s not too smart.” Another time: “That’s kind of lame, her response. She should be more appreciative of my awareness and my appreciation.” Another time: “That must be nice, to be so admired that you can reject more admiration.” And this: “Does she think I’m a creepy stalker? I’m not a creepy stalker! I’m a nice person, dammit! Look, I have friends! Check out my handsome boyfriend! So there!”
Defensiveness, jealousy, insecurity, attack, resentment: check! And check, please. And check yourself, while you’re at it. The message I was feeling, whether any woman meant it that way or not, was: I dressed this way because I want to be looked at, but not by you. You’re not good enough to look at me and appreciate me. You make me feel bad and uncomfortable when you notice me. That’s because there’s something wrong, not good enough, about you.
I’m thinking this may be the way some men feel. I’m also thinking that on my better days, it looks as if I’m sending the same message.
The problem comes from the power imbalance that’s layered on top of this. If I felt that I had a right, an entitlement to attention from the women, on demand, it got nasty (luckily, only in my own mind).
In thinking it over the next day during a run in the woods, I realized what I needed to practice was what I knew how to do well: compersion. I could get pleasure out of the fact that someone else was enjoying herself and her appearance, the same way that I enjoy that the people I love are with other people, enjoying themselves, and it doesn’t have to have anything to do with me.
Really. It’s as simple as that. It doesn’t have to be about me.
As soon as I start thinking that, and get into that compersion state, it’s like getting into a yoga posture where I can suddenly breathe. Even the damned itching stops for a minute. And it’s not about games, or weight, or kicking, or playing offense or defense. It’s just about love.
Thanks for stating this so simply Eric: “Before I go on, however, I must point out that the term “male gaze” is a term of art from feminist cinema critique. It’s not about what one does with one’s eyes. It’s about what the director does with the camera.”
Before feminist critique defined the male gaze, there is the Gaze.
Wikipedia: “Gaze is a psychoanalytical term brought into popular usage by Jacques Lacan to describe the anxious state that comes with the awareness that one can be viewed. The psychological effect, Lacan argues, is that the subject loses a degree of autonomy upon realizing that he or she is a visible object.”
What if the gaze means I am a visible person.
What we perceive through art and media does get translated into how we experience ourselves. We are taught to fear, and to fear desire.
During the Facebook discussion thread, I got the impression from some of the participants that they perceived a difference between the male gaze and the female gaze.
Before I go on, however, I must point out that the term “male gaze” is a term of art from feminist cinema critique. It’s not about what one does with one’s eyes. It’s about what the director does with the camera.
It comes from a 1975 essay by Laura Mulvey called “Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema,” an essay that deserves a critique of its biological and spiritual basis or lack thereof.
You can read that here:
http://imlportfolio.usc.edu/ctcs505/mulveyVisualPleasureNarrativeCinema.pdf
That said, the impression I got from some participants was that the “male gaze” is hostile and aggressive, while the “female gaze” is somehow benevolent. I guess it depends on which female gaze one is talking about.
Remember that we are having this discussion in a heteronormative context — about how men and women interrelate. I have been active as a bisexual since my first sexual experience (which was with another boy), so I can speak to both sides of this, however, let’s stick to male-female hetero for now.
There is a certain look from women that I call the doggie-doo look. Imagine a woman with bare feet, who steps in some dog shit. She has a look of disgust on her face, because it’s kinda gross — only now imagine there is no dog poo, and she’s looking right at you.
That is the “I want sex but since you disgust me, not with you” look. All men have seen this. We who are not attackers or date rapists are very polite about it, respecting it as part of a woman’s prerogative. However, it is painful. One of the most honest discussions about gender relations I ever had was with a British reader of Planet Waves who became a friend, who was fond of reminding women they need to be more gentle about rejecting men and rebuffing male interest.
It was so liberating and vindicating to hear someone actually say this. It was almost as vindicating as the sections of The Second Sex by Simone de Beauvoir, the only feminist book I know of that begins with the biological question, “what is female?” — wherein the author describes female animals that invite and reject sex in the same gesture. You would have to read this for yourself and tell me if it holds up; it’s one of many discussions in her approx 75 page first section that addresses the biology of female and the biology of sex and reproduction. Simone was smart. She knew where to begin.
The last line of my previous comment is more accurate if I add in there… perceived, or felt as dangerous…
Thanks for this juicy discussion.
Thank you Maria for the post that brings up something.
This passage grabbed me:
“The message I was feeling, whether any woman meant it that way or not, was: I dressed this way because I want to be looked at, but not by you. You’re not good enough to look at me and appreciate me. You make me feel bad and uncomfortable when you notice me. That’s because there’s something wrong, not good enough, about you.
I’m thinking this may be the way some men feel. I’m also thinking that on my better days, it looks as if I’m sending the same message.”
Whether networking for business or sex, one’s time, attention and proximity are valuable and one must be discerning about who gets to take up the space. A strategy is required, a strategy built on presence, confidence, compassion, and appreciation of everyone in the room, excited at the potential of the unexpected, with the understanding that we all make like bees and butterflies, not alighting too long on any flower. I think bees are models of compersion, Maria.
Instead, our inner teenager shows up in fancy dress, projecting and reflecting our own insecurities. It does bring up memories of fourth grade, and how inadequate I felt to sit at the table with the blond, blue-eyed, skinny, rich girls from town.
In the daily world, it would be so nice if we each owned ourselves, our sex, our desire, our attractiveness, and our right to admire and be admired, with appreciation, even adoration. it could be OK for us to amp the eroticism of the attention up or down, and the accept the other person’s attention or response without it becoming a federal case.
I remember when I was a small child of 6 or 7 riding down the county roads in Tennessee with my Daddy in the pickup truck cab. We approached the chain gang digging ditches. Daddy made me get down on the cab floor as we passed. I asked why? He said so the men wouldn’t look at me. That’s how intense the protection was. Ironically, it didn’t occur to him to protect me and the other young women and girls in the family from Daddy’s father’s gaze. Or maybe he did protect me, and I didn’t know about it.
I did a quick review of “male gaze” in a google search and came up with this Dinosaur Comic that explains it in 6 frames: http://www.qwantz.com/index.php?comic=859
I scanned Eric’s FB thread reveals a lot of hot feelings and vitriol and taking sides. Male Gaze does seem to be a plank in the feminist platform that doesn’t go away. That video from India was strange. Comforting and empowering at face value from a woman’s POV. I do believe the video is culturally specific to India where men may feel they have the inalienable right to leer and ogle at any female who is solo or with a group of females. Not exclusive to India, which is why it strikes a nerve with all. But then the video and it’s theme becomes a hall of mirrors. Mirrors: perception, projection, reflection, magik. Perseus battling Medusa with his mirror-polished shield.
Periodically I’ll get calls to art shows inviting women artists to turn the tables, and objectify males. Throw up the mirror so to speak. I see no value in objectifying men in this way. These conversations turn my mind to a long term project I’ve been working on for years, and I am about half way through. 100 cocks. Sometimes when I invite a man to model he’ll say “sure, if I can draw your vulva.” That provokes something in me. It is not what the artwork is about.
Suddenly, I’m asking myself, what is 100 Cocks about? Bear with me, I am working something out here, while you watch.
My original impulse was admiration and adoration — and holiness — because that was what the men felt who modeled. They inspired me. They’d never felt pure, unadulterated appreciation of their cock and masculinity before. Lots of other feelings showed up in the men who’ve participated. The artist gives a particular kind of attention and love to the subject of the drawing.
In the context of the male gaze as a construct of film, media, and advertizing, 100 Cocks could be reclaiming the cock from the silence imposed by the “male gaze”. Women’s bodies may be objectified, but men’s bodies are silenced. They are never shown. (Neither are vulvas, but female pubic hair is allowed). I knew that a penis in a movie is an automatic XXX rating, and that people are really scared of images of penises. It’s the male gaze filter. The image of the penis is gay, scary, violent, evil. or
funny, silly, embarrassing, a joke. Don’t show penises, but do make jokes about them.
So 100 Cocks the Art Project is about masculine beauty, and adoration of the penis. Each drawing is about me: I get to be completely absorbed in a penis, and I have the power: I hold the pencil and the paper. The man, that’s a 100 different experiences, and reasons to say yes to being drawn, and feelings while being drawn. But so far, the experiences are overwhelmingly positive.
If the Male Gaze has the default position that penises are dangerous, then the eyes of the person who has a penis may also be dangerous. Gazes, like penises, can be penetrating.
Yes, Amanda, that’s what I’ve felt too when that has happened to me. At one time I worked in a place where that kind of invasion was commonplace and, like you at the time, didn’t have psychic armor to bounce the crap back where it came from and I did feel like “it” got on me. I also think that as we move toward not “owning” other human beings, we will move beyond it, or the energy of it will change because we humans will change. Are changing. Thanks, Eric, for the information about the Psychic Self Defense book. Though I think I’m pretty good at being aware of the energies around me and getting out of the way of the bad ones, it would still be helpful, I’m sure. And you’re right, they release some kind of anesthetizing cloud where I can feel my brain go “what was that?” and my hackles go up like a coyote who’s been startled and I get really quiet mentally and pay close attention. And it has nothing to do with sex, I think it’s frightened people spreading their fear and crap around because they either don’t know better, or they actively want others to be frightened too. Frightened people are the most dangerous ones.
@amanda-
I call this being energetically slimed. In your case there was an overt sexual gesture involved, so you had a clue what happened and when; such is also not necessary to have a similar energetic invasion. Such an invasion can be by a person of either sex toward any other sex or gender. It can happen in proximity or over a distance. You may or may not know the person involved. The topic or famework does not need to be sex, though it’s often a convenient one.
I think that most of us, if we ran through our repertoire of experiences, could come up with one or two or more examples. It is disgusting to experience; it can be toxic and harmful, or pass quickly, depending on the circumstances.
Alcohol is a common co-factor, as are bars and taverns, where many people infested with entities hang out. Then other people go there and pry themselves open with alcohol, making themselves more vulnerable. (I consider a bar about the worst place to get drunk for this reason.)
One of my worst such experiences came from reading a psychically invasive, cruel horoscope column on the internet — one specific astrological event, described by one specific group of words, once. It took me weeks to recover from it. Naturally I no longer ever mention this astrologer, or go to this person’s website, and I maintain a safe distance at conferences.
The most insidious incidents are when we don’t know it’s happening. The assailant can release what I call a purple fart that is anesthesizing and/or distracting, then the invasion happens. Those who work with astrology, tarot or energy healing clients need to be careful about this. The energy gateway that opens up between you and your client can run in both directions and carries things other than white light.
There is a great old book called Psychic Self Defense that was recommended to me by my old friend Mikio. It describes many ways to avoid this, as well as to protect yourself against witchcraft and various other commonplace things.
There are ways to protect yourself that most healers could teach you for when you’re walking in the dark, or through slimy, dangerous places, or around dark, slimy and dangerous people.
What a great discussion! It has reminded me a few things I would like to share.
I used to have a Friday evening routine of, sort out the children’s stuff, (food, bath bed etc.) Then I would have long bath, and get dressed up. Silk dress, high heels (heels in my world are not for walking in, just foot decoration), perfume, music, low light, (venus stuff again) and then just chill out at home. Read a book, write, listen to the radio, look out the window, whatever… A couple of my friends thought it was odd behaviour, but they were my friends because they loved my weirdness.
I had had a ‘life puzzle’ for years. And then one day, ‘oh this has nothing to do with me’. I can be a chatterbox (quite) – I love meeting people and chatting:; triviality, phatic (?), greasing the social wheels. It used to puzzle me that quite regularly within the first ten lines of conversation a man would suddenly start talking about ‘family’ or introduce a ‘we’, to my mind completely out of context. I had for a long time assumed that I was responsible for putting something ‘out there’, and being told politely ‘don’t go there’. I probably was putting something ‘out there’ – just me, just energy. And what I was getting back was their response to the energy, not a response to my intent. Mmmm, interesting.
I have fond memories of a time when I lived in a sea-side town and the dynamics were straight-forward. In my peer group, in the winter when the town was quiet, people generally paired-up to get through the season. I didn’t pair-up but that is fine and understood. In the summer, fun times! Just lots of new people, new energy, and I’m sure lots of sex. But before lots of sex, lots of conversation. And dancing.
Have a great day!
nilou
Thanks for this conversation, I’ve been following with interest. Alexander mentioned that this debate takes place “in a culture such as ours”, American, early 21st century. As an American woman living in France now for years, I’ve noticed that the French have a different take on sexuality in general. I don’t think they’ve got it all figured out since there is stil rape and inequality. But there seems to be an acceptance of sexuality that allows room for playing with it. They seem to play with the sexual energy between themselves.
The gaze is a very important part of expressing interest. But women don’t seem to be upset that men are interested in them…rather they play right back. It is a sort of lively game.
A curious example, workplace harrassement does exist, but it would be more of the psychological type. I have heard women express a sort of surprise or disappointment when the work evironment doesn’t have a little bit of spice, yes. Compliments, slight touches (the French kiss daily on both cheeks. The codes here are long to explain and are evolving), inuendos among co-workers and friends are part of life.
Then there are open references to sex, teenagers allowed to have sex without feeling guilty, affairs going on … it’s just dfferent, more open.
How do I feel about this?
Sometimes uncomfortable, having grown up in a sexually conservative environment in the midwest. But generally, I’ve learned to appreciate it, play the game somewhat ( yes, me!) and enjoy the much more lively interactions among people. It all fits into a cultural context that includes good conversation, slow food, self love. I’m not saying this is a model, but I felt it is good to point it out.
xo
“We all have the choice to be aware, informed, enlightened and compassionate.” Yes.
Thank you for yet another of your wonderful, honest pieces, Maria – which has set off a fascinating discussion. I think one of the most brilliant books I’ve ever read about a woman’s fear of aging and losing her power over men through her looks is Doris Lessing’s The Summer Before the Dark,
http://www.amazon.com/Summer-Before-Dark-Vintage-International/dp/0307390624.
I’m taking the conversation in a different direction here, which ties in with another aspect of Maria’s piece. I went to a party last night with a group of people I rarely see. The last time I saw them was in early spring when I was at my lowest ebb. I had been unable to find work for months and was in a pit of depression and despair and ended up running away from the party. Last night I felt on top of the world after my recent good news with work and was wearing a lovely green t-shirt dress which I had picked up cheap from a shop near my house. But I felt I had to tone my joy down a bit because so many of the people there seemed depressed and downtrodden. I remembered how I had been feeling not many months ago, but I also saw how people just don’t really communicate with one another at these gatherings, how stressful they can be on one level. As always I think it’s necessary to tune in to awareness.
This is the kind of debate that emerges in a culture such as ours – where sex, like everything else, is viewed as a commodity. Of course, all commodities are desired from a perspective of either ownership or consumption. Also, such objects exist *outside* the perceiving self.
We all encounter the rules of this cattle market. This is reinforcing and becomes ubiquitous; defining our expectations thoroughly. Of course, we LONG for a better way but.. it seems, being ubiquitous, that alternatives to the cattle market model are unavailable..
There seems no doubting that the way we perceive such scenarios is intimately related to the way we perceive ourselves. Sometimes (often even), it feels easier to feel like a victim of this whole set-up than an active and *effective* participant. We might think to question first of all “what is my felt wanting REALLY about?”
To me, we come back to sex as validation many times, once we explore the sex as commodity urge we are unconsciously buying into. People can want you for deep or superficial reasons, worthy or unworthy ones (and likewise you them). We can tap into that spectrum anywhere we please for noble, ignoble or intense/detached reasons.
What I want, to be healthy, is much less problematic and confusing in the long run if it is a conscious decision around wanting. But that only lives in my private world. After I get clear on that, the only interesting question is the degree to which I am being honest (both with myself and others).
Slick advertising is everywhere (we know this) and it is FULL of dishonesty. So how are you selling yourself?
“Second, when I go out dressed to the nines, I am comfortable with the attention or lack of attention that I attract from others – with one exception, which happens rarely: a particular energetic response that I believe is not unconnected to the idea of “power over” that I make in the first point. It is physically and psychologically unnerving; it is the energetic equivalent of an assault. And I don’t for one moment believe that it is solely to do with my reaction. I am reacting to something coming at me from that person. As I said, it is rare, but it feels dangerous, and I take heed of that and steer well clear.”
just wanted to say that, like sarah, i have also had both of these experiences.
1. i have enjoyed the feeling of comfort in myself and my desirability when noticed (or not) in public, whether “dressed to the nines” or not; it’s a feeling of being appreciated, and i also enjoy offering that energy to others.
and 2. i have also experienced being looked at in a way that felt so energetically invasive, that i felt violated and a little sick to my stomach. the most striking time was when i was in my early teens — not dressed up at all, sitting on a bench in a mall looking for something in my purse, and i looked up to see a man walking by me, holding a rolled-up paper sticking out from his crotch at an angle while he ran his hand along it and stared straight at me. i was shocked, and actually felt as though something of him had gotten inside me. it was gross, but more than that. like i said, it felt invasive and violating.
that kind of sense is rare for me to experience, and that was the most extreme example. maybe at that age i just had no psychic boundaries, but even without the language then to explain it that i have now, it was clear to me i was not being “appreciated” or even “desired.” i was being assaulted, even if there was no physical contact or threat of it.
most of the time, i think that to gaze and appreciate/desire and to be gazed at and appreciated/desired, regardless of which gender is doing the gazing, is healthy and can be a lot of fun. when expectations, fears, projections and dishonesty about what we’re doing get in the way, or some kind of power play, things get messy, un-compassionate, confusing and not terribly fair.
and i think the further we get, culturally and historically, from actually “owning” another person (as in the way marriages were historically treated), the better chance we may have of defusing the “power” of the gaze — assuming that it has had power to begin with. which might have always been more perception than reality.
Very true , No its not easy and the undertaking of resolving it clearly shows this along with the reality of how much we ourselves are involved and the cause of what we readily believed as the others fault.
This awareness gives us the ability of genuine compassion for others because we all are the same in this respect only differing in how it manifests. Reactions become less and less with responses being more accurate to true nature of things generating healing.
We are dealing with fire either way , how we use it determines if it consumes and destroys or purifies producing a more abundant life.
the true hell is in not knowing you have the choice. even that comes at a price.
The sexual and social dance does not have to be as difficult as it is — as people make it. We all have the choice to be aware, informed, enlightened and compassionate. We all have the option to use the pain and struggle of others as a weapon against them, or to help them go past it and find a clear space. We all have the option to heal our own abuse, and to enlist others in that project.
We all respond to the training we get. And if we’re really lucky & really brave, we get the chance to examine some of that training & begin choosing our responses. None of this is easy.
I think there can be more or less baggage. Everyone issues; it’s a matter of how many, and how many minutes into the conversation they evoke a gag reflex.
If you want sex, you have many other options other than dolling up and picking someone up. That is especially true if you value some modesty. Yet no matter what you would still have to admit your desire, which could evoke hypocrisy — that is, someone’s judgment or presumption.
We live in a culture where sex has been taken from us. It has been criminalized. In the minds of most people, sex must have a victim. In that respect, whenever we want to claim our desire, we’re taking back inner territory and cultural territory. To do that we must cross inner boundaries as well as social ones.
And yes we are often running into one another’s stuff. A few years ago I was in contact with a woman who expressed her desire to be photographed by me and have sex with me. We dialoged for a while. One day she said she was coming over. She got in her car, turned the key and drove to my house. Once there, she undressed, participated in the photo session and verbally invited sex with me.
I presumed nothing. I took her cues 100%. I thought we had fun.
The next day, she was angry said she felt manipulated into having sex. And I thought: I am so glad I had the therapist I did, so that I can see through this kind of bullshit. This would be enough to shake anyone’s confidence.
Oh Maria I want to thank you for such an honest sharing .. Bravo to the self inquiry about your thoughts and perceptions vital for the life that wants to live well.
“You know you want to get laid by someone, but if you respond to everyone who sees you in that hot dress (by returning their gaze, or whatever it takes to make connection), now you’re under the obligation to do everyone in the room — or, you’re a tease. That’s why the pretty girl is a bitch — she knows the razor blade she walks is far narrower than her stiletto”
I was once asked by a guy if I used to be fat or ugly because I was too nice for someone that had such good looks. As a female I can understand why he would say this because
I myself have seen many women behave this way being demeaning and cruel too often.
I think that choosing the reaction of being a bitch in response to the belief that your a tease does nothing to resolve this dysfunctional scenario. We are not responsible for the beliefs that others hold about us when we have done nothing to elicit such a belief.
When you do this you own the others projection and this seems to validate their mistaken perception. If you were to offer no reaction and instead continue being your beauty the opportunity for reality to naturally expose their mistaken assumptions is more likely to happen without you ever leaving your center.
The better question that everyone can ask themselves is why they own the others projections and to notice when they project themselves.
All our interactions are infused with currents of emotional energy and the better we know ourselves discernment replaces judgement , we stay in our center doing less and experience more getting done.
Well, I don’t know, Eric. I may be the only person who’s ever had someone say “you wouldn’t wear that if you didn’t want me to fuck you” (when I was wearing a turtleneck & jeans, no less). But I guess that’s where the energetic I’m talking about comes from. Admittedly, I don’t have to take on that obligation, but it is rather unambiguous. You don’t have to have that happen too many times to learn to be cautious about meeting desiring gazes.
But aren’t we all up against each others’ past experiences, every time we meet? And don’t we all have to get past that to have any kind of “honest and respectful encounter”?
Kari, how how how does this become AN OBLIGATION any way other than you thinking that’s what it is? If that is the conditioning I am up against when I meet you, what chance do I have of an honest and respectful encounter if you’ve already made up the whole scenario?
<< because I want to get laid. But I don’t want to walk into a party & suddenly be under the obligation to fuck everyone there >>
If it was really true that women felt an obligation to fuck a man just because he thinks she’s sexy, I would never have a chance to put my clothes on.
Hey, I am a science writer. A good one, too. Being an astrologer, I run the risk of alienating all of my previous editors, being branded a fraud and being called a menace to intellectual decency and consumer confidence.
Here is the original discussion on Facebook.
Here is my article Pornography as the Mirror of Denial, which I would classify as feminist writing.
Thank you, Maria, for a searingly vulnerable article, and the debate that it has sparked. Much gratitude.
I’m entering the debate only to make two personal observations:
First, rape is not about desire, nor is it about violence (although that is often involved). It is about power – specifically, “power over”.
Second, when I go out dressed to the nines, I am comfortable with the attention or lack of attention that I attract from others – with one exception, which happens rarely: a particular energetic response that I believe is not unconnected to the idea of “power over” that I make in the first point. It is physically and psychologically unnerving; it is the energetic equivalent of an assault. And I don’t for one moment believe that it is solely to do with my reaction. I am reacting to something coming at me from that person. As I said, it is rare, but it feels dangerous, and I take heed of that and steer well clear.
I find that one of the symptoms of ‘Western’ culture is its obsession with the appearance of things (and people). That you really make an assessment about your own worth or that of someone else from the brand of a handbag or the heel-height on their shoe.
These trappings (I use the word deliberately) have so very little to do with sex and sexuality in my world. Among my closest group of female friends we are all in agreement that being sexy and looking desirable are very different. Ever had that experience of the biggest shiniest apple/tomato/sharon fruit (I love sharon fruit) in the shop that delivered nothing on taste or texture. The same problem exists with food, since I’ve wandered into that particular avenue. Never mind the nutritional value, let alone the joy of taking pleasure in eating, it can be sold on its appearance.
Well I like russets. And vintage port. I like using the facility of discernment. Games could be fun, but only as long as everyone knows what the rules are, and even better if the rules are formed from consensus among the players. And only if the game is ‘everyone gets to have fun’. If the game is ‘dress up for a shag’, I’ll be at home playing, quite possibly solitaire.
Gazes. That is a whole ‘nother story I’m saving for my grandchildren (if I’m blessed with any).
Eric, I appreciate all you’re saying. I do. But I hope I didn’t suggest that I thought “we end up with this weird, unspoken agreement” meant this is fundamental to human nature, or in any way right or empowered or responsible behavior. This is what advertising, and religion, and laziness, and fear, who-knows-what-all-else has created out of desire and being desired.
Yes, I (taking hypothetical ownership here) put on the hot dress, which I’ve work my ass off for, so I know I look amazing in it, because I want to get laid. But I don’t want to walk into a party & suddenly be under the obligation to fuck everyone there.
You’ve done a lot of work around sexuality with Book of Blue — you must have encountered someone once or twice putting the energy out that you owe them something because you’ve stirred their desire. You have to know what that threat feels like. The fun’s over. It can’t just be sexy fun when that dynamic is in play (and in this sexphobic/sex-obsessed culture, it’s in play unless both parties have done the work to defuse it).
The other part of this, which I didn’t bring up earlier is that, once I (in my hot dress) have stirred your desire, I have the power/responsibility to say “sorry, hon. Not my type” if you’re not what I’m after. And the fact is, that’s not as easy as just avoiding eye contact in the first place. I’m not saying it’s right. I’m just saying it’s less complicated. Because once again, if I have the wherewithal to take responsibility for my sexiness (which this culture doesn’t encourage), saying “sorry, hon” still puts me at risk of being branded a tease. And in this game, that’s a reputation you don’t get over.
Moreover, I love this whole line of thought: “No matter who you are, you cannot stop others from desiring you. Anyone can take one look at you and masturbate thinking about you, and assuming it happens where you physically are not, you have no power over that. They can lust, they can fall in love, they can want and need and all the rest, and you cannot do anything about it.
Yes, absolutely. That’s you owning your desire & not expecting me to do anything about it. Awesome. I would love to know that I walked into the party & (presuming you weren’t my type) you enjoyed the hot dress enough to go masturbate. That’s brilliant. I own my desirability; you own your desire. And we both get the thrill. We don’t have to match up to both experience sexiness.
As for You have the right to protect yourself from certain kinds of conduct toward you, but that is it, avoiding eye contact & not responding to those you don’t think you’ll be into are among the ways you protect yourself at parties.
…I didn’t limit this to the male gaze because I don’t think it’s gender-limited. I think it has far more to do with the fact that culturally, we’re supposed to be sexy but our “value” lives in inverse proportion to our “number”.
First within, then without.
I used to regularly wear menswear as a teenager/adolescent because
– it suited the shape of my body better – eg could actually get my thighs in trousers and not have a foot of unnecessary waistline to contend with
– better value for money esp. quality/price, styling (could get proper cotton shirts as opposed to that shoulder-pad thing that was going on in the 80s, lots of lycra and polyester, I recall)
– better protection from the unwanted gaze – I already had enough reasons for uninvited staring without the breast display
I think I may give it go again, just for a while, just for me. Not for the practicalities, but for the fun. My inner tom-boy had to grow up and help with the children many years ago, now he would just like to come out and play. Or maybe not. Maybe he’d just like to be seen. Actually I’ve never understood the rational for men wearing trousers and women wearing skirts…
I think I have for the first time understood why detachment is such an important aspect of mindfulness. Detachment and non-judgment.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3gKInTBYrMw
“Everyone owns” means that the bottom line is that your feelings are your own. By “secondary truth” I mean that if I hide behind a closet, come out and say “Boo!” the primary truth is that I startled you; and the next layer down is you calm down and take ownership of your feelings and recognize there is no threat.
I object to most of these discussions for two reasons. One is the conflation of looking and raping. I don’t care how anyone feels about it; they are different. Even if looking is perceived as a threat, which it almost never actually is intended as, it’s not the same as the action of rape, a violent felony, carried out. We are almost in the territory of “porno causes rape” here.
The whole discussion of rape centers around how it’s not about sex. It’s about violence. So the sexy outfit, the gazing male, the gazing female, and so on, are outside that violence-centered motive; rape is tantamount to murder. If a defense lawyer raises the skirt as his client’s defense, we could try transposing that onto a murder case and see how it holds up.
My second objection is that we live in a culture of voyeurs and exhibitionists. Fame, looking good, being noticed, being seen, being special are all standard fare. Given that, it’s reasonable to expect the seeing and being seen to go on. To suddenly intervene and describe this as a one-sided attack on the meek and the vulnerable by the vicious and immoral ignores many obvious facts.
I object to the blame being laid on ALL men by the kinds of advertising campaigns I was objecting to in my Facebook thread.
One last thought. No matter who you are, you cannot stop others from desiring you. Anyone can take one look at you and masturbate thinking about you, and assuming it happens where you physically are not, you have no power over that. They can lust, they can fall in love, they can want and need and all the rest, and you cannot do anything about it. You have the right to protect yourself from certain kinds of conduct toward you, but that is it.
There is something megalo about dressing specifically to evoke a response, then evoking that response (which I am saying here is mental or sensory), and then taking the position that the other person cannot notice, cannot feel something, should not look or see something in public or is not entitled to their experience of their own senses.
…and I’m not tracking you on “secondary truth” Does that mean you don’t have to take responsibility if you’re confronted with someone who’s intentionally sexy?
Gonna disagree on this: “It is also true that everyone owns”
We’re responsible for ourselves, but taking that responsibility is not something we all do.
Everyone — everyone — knows that dressing is a way to elicit a response from others. Dressing is a statement; it’s a psychological tool; an aesthetic mode of expression; it is the image, built consciously and intentionally by the maker of the image.
It is also true that everyone owns and is responsible for their feelings, and their responses to their environment, though that is something of a secondary truth when they are confronted by something that is intentionally designed to evoke a response, make a statement or to manipulate.
Both sides of this discussion need to be present for this topic.
Maria, thank you for opening this discussion here. I’ve been working with this a lot lately. I think one of the things that happens with desire in this culture is that we are so terrified of its power that we put a hell of a lot of effort into giving it away or sublimating it so that we don’t have to recognize it as our own.
So we end up with this weird, unspoken agreement along the lines of “You whet my desire by being beautiful, so you’re now obligated to satiate it.” I think it’s a foundational premise under what we’re calling rape culture. As long as my desire is your fault, I don’t have to take responsibility, or claim my own power, or do the existential gruntwork that humanity asks of me. And not only is it easier to not own our desire, religion has made it so nearly forbidden to do so that we mostly don’t know how.
So it’s complicated as hell, when you get dressed up for that party, whose desire you’re willing to whet. You know you want to get laid by someone, but if you respond to everyone who sees you in that hot dress (by returning their gaze, or whatever it takes to make connection), now you’re under the obligation to do everyone in the room — or, you’re a tease. That’s why the pretty girl is a bitch — she knows the razor blade she walks is far narrower than her stiletto.
Obviously, there’s a lot going on, but one aspect of it is self-preservation.