Game of Thrones

Is there such a thing as "chick flicks" and "boy humour" in film and tv? Are we really such simple creatures that we can draw hard gender lines when it comes to entertainment? I would like to say no, but I am loathe to admit that this hard line keeps showing up when I try to watch film or tv with my partner. Generally I don't watch much of either, so I am very picky with how I spend my precious time watching a screen. It had better be worth it - and plotless action flicks with lots of things being blown up just don't tend to do it for me.

For him, on the other hand, it is a release of his frustrations of a hard day to watch other people release their anger and play out the hero against the evil guys. He lives out his frustrations vicariously through this mindless entertainment - his own words!

And I admit my Sex And The City addiction - it's like a box of chocolates when I'm feeling down or ill. I know all of the episodes inside out but I still get a gentle high from emerging myself in the light but moving entertainment of listening to four women deal with the paradoxes of being independent, career oriented, and still seeking love. Whereas my partner is done after a few minutes.

So it was quite something for us to find a series we both enjoy - and Game of Thrones has us both completely addicted, partly because of how cleverly woven together an increasingly complex cast of characters and shifting alliances keeps emerging. Who would have thought medieval power play could be so enthralling? It's like one endless chess game and we have caught ourselves discussing the next possible moves over a meal....

Which has led me to wonder at the gender aspect of this series. One friend of mine calls it "Tits and Dragons", which is kind of summing it up - minus the zombies, of course. There are endless gory bloody scenes to satisfy the need for violence, interspersed with unashamed shots of women dropping their clothes to reveal perfect white breasts. Is this not a series aimed at a particular male gaze?

I do find myself rolling my eyes occasionally when a titty shot seems contrived, inserted simply to satisfy the quota in an episode, but I can't help appreciate the diversity of characters of both gender. There are men playing out the shadow side of masculinity just as there are women playing out this same desire for violence. There are women representing the divine goddess just as there are men representing the divine protector.

The women inspire me for what they represent of the unwanted side of the female as well as their strengths. There are indeed dumb helpless blonds, who learn to use sex as an instrument of affection but also of power. There are prostitutes who both enjoy their sexuality and are prisoners of it. There are women who have ensured their seats of power by seducing with their dark side, fully aware of how to manipulate through the use of their lips and hips. And there are intelligent women, the ones who represent the queen archetype from her more enlightened side. There are the ones who refuse to be ladies, playing out their true nature in mens' roles dressed as boys or men, but not denying their identity. Women are portrayed as virgin, whore, mother, queen, crone, and never entirely dependent on the men around them for their status.

The men intrigue me. There are those with limits in the eyes of society - dwarf, bastard, illiterate, poor - who find a way to assert themselves. There are virgins and abusers. There have been several kings and leaders who have absolutely no idea how to lead, and some young princes who have had to step up and learn how to do so. There is the megalomaniac, the sadist, the torturer, the rapist, the soldier, and some of these can also be the righteous warrior, the king, the lover, the magician. The good guys sometimes suck at protecting the village, the bad guys sometimes turn out to be the good guys. Some of them are weak in the face of womens' sexuality, others are inspired by it.

The point is, there is a lot of humanity represented here. Good and evil are not represented in a squeaky clean Hollywood style, but as elements in all of us. We all have the potential to love, to lead, to inspire, to injure, to kill, to humiliate, to destroy, both covertly and overtly  I love how many powerful women there are in a context that could have become a "boy's" festival of tits and blood and power. And I love how many archetypes keep showing up without it being a moralistic story of good and evil.

 And on a personal note, I love how many redheads keep appearing!









Nature shows up as a powerful force as well - in spirituality, in seasons, in the long summer and the long winter, the representation of life and death, in prophetic dreams, and in the White Walkers. There are many layers of mystical storytelling that represent so much about us as men and women, that makes it unexpectedly appealing and

Only one question remains: How the hell did the zombies make it into this story?

Valkyries of War

Though I would not be proud to stand up and say that women are equally responsible for atrocities committed in times of conflict as men, it would be a false dichotomy to deny it. In fact, I find the tendency to point the finger at men for being the wagers of war, and to assert that if more women were in power we'd have less war, to be utterly abhorrent.

Why? Because it creates a divide, and perpetuates another war that is otherwise slowly dying out and really has had its time. The battle of the sexes is no longer a war we need to fight. To lay the blame at the feet of one gender and expect that women, purely by reason of their gender, would not resort to war in international relations, is a naive and divisive standpoint.

This idea has been challenged recently with some interesting twists in the media. Obama was at first reticent to use force in Libya, and many of his (male) security advisors were against getting involved in another expensive, uncertain conflict on foreign shores, given the messes in Afghanistan and Iraq. In the end it appears it was due to the pursuasiveness of three top women advisors in his administration that he was convinced to take military action. And because it was three women, the media leapt on it.

They have been called the "Valkyries of War", and the mission has been dubbed by one journalist as the "war of the three sisters". Juicy stuff! And cause for many questions.

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, together with Samantha Power, senior policy advisor on the National Security Council, and US ambassador to the UN Susan Rice, are "credited" with having made the final push on the no-fly zone and the US involvement in the UN authorised use of force in Libya. And of course the media love this unlikely trio of war-hungry women, with New York Times stories of the "girls taking on the guys" in the White House, and NBC stories covering the phenomenon of women policy advisors taking on the men.

There seems to be a suprise that women would give the push for involvement in warfare. But there are two sides to this story to consider.

One is that women have, unfortunately, but realistically, been involved in warfare throughout history.

Although it requires a bit of digging to find them, there are many historical examples of women leaders who waged war and fought on the frontlines of battles. Characters like Joan of Arc, ancient Arabian women warriors Kahula and Wafeira, 11th Century Queen of Arragon, 16th Century Grainne O'Malley the Irish Pirate Queen (depicted right, at her historical meeting with Queen Elizabeth I, another determined female leader of the time) are not unique examples. And let us not forget the 20th century's Margaret Thatcher, a prime minister whose legacy includes the Falklands war as well as her integral role in ensuring her pal August Pinochet did not get extradited from the UK for his pending trial in Spain for crimes against humanity.

In recent history there were a number of women on trial at Nuremberg in the Doctor's Trial and the Justices Trial, many of whom were executed for their participation in heinous atrocities at the concentration camps and in the Nazi administration. Currently at the Extraordinary Criminal Chambers of Cambodia, where members of the Pol Pot regime of the 1970's are on trial, a number of women stand as defendants. (See one of my favourite blogs for more info on this: IntLawGrrls, where the image below of Maria Mandel, executed for her role as a prison guard at Auschwitz, is also from.)

And in mythology there are plenty of images of the female warrior. The very fact that the US involvement in Libya has given rise to talk of "Valkyries of war" is testament to the fear instilled by such images. The destroyer is in many goddess archetypes, like Kali, Nike, Athena (depicted right), Minerva, and indeed the Nordic Valkyries, though interestingly enough these goddesses also often embody the corollary nature of life-giver, fertility, mother.

And let's not and let's not forget such pop culture warriors as Xena Warrior Princess, Wonder Woman (see my blog post on WW), Shera, Buffy the Vampire Slayer, Lara Croft (or any other number of Angelina Jolie characters!).



We women have the capacity for destruction in us as well. Any notion that women running the world would ensure a war-free existence is naive, unbalanced, destructive to forwarding a new dialogue of equality, and even patronising. Not that I champion women as war-wagers, but let's move on from such essentialist ideas as the "fairer sex" being all peace-loving, and men being the only guilty ones. Let's start from reality and move forward from there.

The other side of this story is that the media jumped onto the idea of the Valkyries, as if the these advisors pushing for warfare were blood-lusting destructive sirens, who lured the innocent Obama into war. But perhaps there were other factors in the political stance taken by these women?

Hillary Clinton was reportedly luke-warm on going in to Libya, but it is asserted that memories of Rwanda during her husband's presidency led her to shift to a more pro-active stance. Sarah Power was given her post in the Obama administration at least partly due to her outspoken stance on genocide and the need to intervene. She has won prizes for her publications on this very point. And Rice was also part of the Clinton administration when the horrors of Rwanda and the failure of the international community to intervene became apparent.

While the atrocities in Libya cannot amount to genocide as a matter of international law, it could be posited that these women were pushing for intervention for humanitarian reasons, rather than for blood-lusty power-based ones.

The point, to me, is that if there is anything "inherent" about war and conflict, it is perhaps the "unconscious masculine" in us all, both women and men. The waging of war for one's own selfish ends - oil reserves to keep the car industry going, control over other resource fuels or water, control over regions which threaten one's own cultural and political domination, religious ferver - these are the result of the unconscious masculine, the shadow of the warrior archetype. And that potential is in all of us.

On the other hand, the conscious masculine, the healthy warrior archetype, is willing to fight when it is necessary. When one's territory, family, safety, integrity is threatened by the force of another's shadow-driven attack. It is entirely appropriate to bring out the (she-)wolf and to fight to the death in some situations. Humanitarian intervention may be what inspires this conscious use of force. In fact it may well be a feminine (note: not "female", but "feminine"!) urge to protect and heal that leads to such interventionist use of force. And that potential is in us all as well. (See my blog post on "Dear Woman")

Valkyries of war? Maybe, but let's consider what is behind the political decision, rather than simply focus on the gender of those pushing for these decisions.

The New Wonder Woman?

I've posted in the past about Why I Love Wonder Woman and everything she stands for. Her back-story is one of female strength, wisdom and beauty, bestowed by the gods and representing everything that a female warrior is. Her creation is one of early feminism, and she stands for peace and justice. So it's probably about time they made a film about her, among the spate of comic book heroes being brought to life on the big screen.

It's a shame, then, that DC Comics have decided it's time to "update" this 70 year old icon. Modernisation is not a bad thing in and of itself, but if it entails changing everything familiar about this female role model, from her costume to the very roots of her existence, one has to question it. Why, oh why DC???

Their justification for changing her famous costume has been that critics questioned how WW could fight crime without her bits falling out. She's a comic book super hero, people! They always fight crime without their bits falling out! That's why Superman wears his underpants on the outside and Catwoman never has to zip herself in or out of her impossible latex getup.

It should be said, WW has been "updated" in the past. Originally her creator had her wearing a star-spangled skirt, until it was conceded this would be flying up and around her head most of the time she was in action, so they put her in shorts instead. These gradually became hotpants and then even a high-cut leotard over the decades, but at least they remained recogniseable as WW's getup.





Reducing WW's bust size may be a bit of a more realistic move, but removing the gold W from her breast??? Granted, this was only introduced in the 1980's, prior to which WW wore a golden eagle on her chest. She had, after all, been invented during the second world war as an American hero. DC decided to make er appeal more universal by having the Wonder Woman Foundation (an actual women's rights organisation) present her with a doubled W and asking her two wear it to represent women around the world.

So she has seen some changes over the years. The worst was in the 1960's when the story writers for some inexplicable reason decided to remove all her powers and her costume altogether, and name her The New Wonder Woman. She was a mod crime fighter in a fashionable 1960's minidress, but she was not a super hero. Thankfully DC returned to its senses in the 1970's and WW was given back her true identity.

Given that WW's readership has always been slightly smaller than that of her male counterparts, and given the trend of bringing our old fave comic book heros to the big screen, now is indeed the time to vamp up WW's image. There has been talk of a film for many years now, but beyond the basic 80's style animation film that was released straight to dvd in 2009, not much movement has been made. So it is understandable that at a moment of celebrating her 600th (unofficial) issue on paper, DC is looking to gain more attention for its protagonist female, and one suspects the push to film may follow.

But it was a mistake to mess with her backstory, depriving her of the upbringing on Paradise Island (Themniscyra) among the Amazon women, shifting her pacifist origins into an urban commando chic. And it was a big mistake to strip her of the familiar colours and garb we have come to know. Especailly as it has been reduced to bad 1990's bolero fashion and black skin-tight trousers. She has lost all originality.

She resembles the splinter character Donna Troy (right), who was developed from WW's adopted younger sister.


Her bullet-resisting bracelets have become tie-on gauntlets and her corset has an eerily Spiderman-like design. And perhaps the black choker was introduced because the new gauntlets have lost their subtle suggestion of S & M (which WW's original creator had as part of her sexuality and her strength). Unfortunately the overal result is a shopping mall teenager instead of a mature arse-kicking ambassador of justice.

DC, if you want to raise the profile of this all-important female hero, do so with some respect for her creation, her symbolism and her long-lasting appeal. If you reduce her to a fashion victim with a less impressive history driving her, the endless stalling of bringing her to film will continue. Everyone wants to put her on the big screen, no-one knows how because of the inconsistencies in her character. Keep it simple, keep it strong. And keep true to what is so insipiring about this feminist, pacifist heroine.

Women in Power

Last month I attended a 4 day workshop in the north of England with women from all over the world, under the guidance of ALissa Starkweather and some other highly trained women. We were taken into a ritualised world of symbolic animalism, of shadow work, of reconnecting to our inner predators and in doing so, reclaiming our power.

The weekend is called Women in Power and I would recommend it to absolutely any woman interested in doing some deeper work on herself. (it's only held once a year in the UK and not yet anywhere else in Europe, but a few times a year in the US, so check it out!) Some women went to heal old wounds, to claim a power they hadn't yet dared to claim as their own, to find their voice. I went because I know I am a powerful woman, but I have never truly owned all of my power, particularly that of my predator energy!

Jung spoke about our shadow as being the disowned part of ourselves, which we either try to supress or project onto others, never taking responsibility for it and therefore rather than owning it, it owns us. For me, the shadow is an anger, a hatred, a buried aggression, a desire to destroy. I saw so much anger and aggression around me as I grew up that I swore I would never be the way my angry, bitter parents were towards each other. But in doing so I disowned that aggression and it comes out left, right and centre without my willing it to.

Through the work we did over this magical weekend, I got to really enact and own that shadow in a safe space, where the women around me trusted my shadow. I got to feel what it is to destroy, and to recognise that this shadow is jsut energy, like everything else, wanting to be expressed. I discovered it is life energy and it wants me to know I am life itself. And through this I came to the recognistion that I am both destroyer and life-giver, like the dark goddess Kali.

I had women who are mothers bless my womb, I got to ritualise the abortion I had over 10 years ago and finally let go of the dead energy I had secretly been carrying around. I got to see other women look their own shadows in the face and be with their darker sides like never before. And I discovered my purpose in this: to hear and take the suffering of others, swallow it, devour it, abort it and bury it. Destroy the suffering that life may be given anew.

We shed so many tears as we felt compassion for each other, we laughed out loud, we discovered fun things about women's sexuality and biology, we ate divine food together, we danced and sang together, it was a transformational weekend. We all left feeling powerful, beautiful creatures.

Not everyone is open to taking on this kind of thing, but it's such important self-actualisation, self-awareness, growth and individuation. I was turned on to it by a friend who has done similar work with the Mankind Project - I was so excited to learn men are doing this kind of work together! There is nothing sexier than a man who knows himself and who is unafraid to step into his masculinity. And now to step into the predator, destroyer part of myself, I trust and know myself on a deeper level than ever before, and I can step into my femininity, knowing it has many sides to it and I own all of them.

I always thought of myself as a powerful woman. I now know myself to be a woman in my power.

Why I love Wonder Woman

Anyone who knows me knows of my almost obsessive fascination with the pop culture icon Wonder Woman. She is less well known in a lot of European countries, but in the Anglo-American world she is on equal par with Catwoman, Supergirl, Superman and Batman. In fact she is a member of the Justice League and stands together with Batman and Superman as one of the lead characters.

But why this fascination? For the very fact that she is one of the few female heroes who actually offers something inspiring beyond skin-tight, revealing super outfits and impossible proportions. And for everything she stands for.

Wonder Woman was created by the psychologist William Moulton Marston in the 1940's. he had written a series of articles on the importance of (super) heroes as role models and the role of pop culture in this positive modelling. DC Comics approached him to create a character and he rightly pointed out they had NO female heroes. So he dreamed up Wonder Woman, an Amazon Princess whose job it was to teach humanity, then in the throes of World War II, about justice, peace and truth.

The back-story of this character is full of symbolism and heavily influenced by Greek mythology. On the island of Themniscyra, hidden in the Bermuda Triangle, a community of Amazon warrior women lives in a paradise of peace and immortality. Their task is to guard over Pandora's Box, and if any man's blood is shed on their island then the Box will release all manner of darkness into the world. (Read: Women as protectors, the mother energy, guarding the dark side of humanity.)

The Queen, Hyppolita, misses only one thing - a daughter. Living in a paradise of only women has it's downfalls, there is no male company to balance things out. Instead she prays to the gods and moulds a child out of the clay of the earth, and the gods bestow life upon this girl who is literally of the earth. (Read: Women as mothers, as creators, the earth as the ultimate life-giver, intutitive connection to the gods.)

They then bestow gifts of beauty, strength and wisdom upon her - so no weird chemical reactions or spider bites, but heavenly powers giving her a goddess-like status. When she comes of age she wins a contest to donne the crown of Wonder Woman and go off to "man's world" to teach the justice and peace oriented ways of the Amazons. (Read: Self sacrifice and leadership, seeking balance in conflict, offering feminine wisdom to the masculine fighting spirit.) She embodies what is often seen as an essentially feminine purpose - the healing of the world.

She carries a lasso of truth, which forces those whom she ensares to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Masterton is credited with having also invented the lie detector, so his fascination with truth-telling came through in his comic book character. Not only that, but his poly-amourous relationships and his study (and his practice!) of bondage and BDSM, and the dynamics of power and gender in this form of sexual expression, are reflected in WW's costume (the slave bracelets, the lasso) and the regularity with which she is tied up, bound, locked down and has to escape.

Despite the fact she was a product of the World War II years, she is shown breaking these bonds and chains with the regularity and deftness of a modern feminist (no-one is ever to blame, she simply busts out of the shackles and continues her message of equality and peace). She embodies the wisdom and strength of a mature elder, the independence of a woman who knows she doesn't need to play any certain role in life to be fulfilled, and yet the perfect complexity and emotional paradox that many women express - searching for what fulfills her heart she is unafraid to cry and show her vulnerable side in between fighting the Nazi axis or her more fantastic nemeses. She has the female warrior power as well as the softer, flowing feminity, a wholeness so many of us desire.

It's interesting then that she "lost" her powers when the "New Wonder Woman" series emerged in the 1960's. Suddenly she was just a sex symbol and she lost track of the very things which she stands for as a role model. A reflection of the shifts in political thought at the time.










Thankfully, with some strange twists in continuity, she was given her powers again in the 1970's (perhaps again due to shifts in sexual politics?), and the camp TV series with Lynda Carter gave her a new place in pop culture.

Whether the TV series was true to her deeper symbolic side remains highly questionable, but the fact that she was sky-rocketed to the forefront of the imagination of boys, girls, men and women alike says something about how right Masterton was all along that we need heroes and positive role models.

 And preferably something more than the latex-clad Catwoman who emodies the seductive, "dangerous" myth of women's sexuality, and something beyond the submissive, diminiutive role played by Supergirl.

 We need a complex, multi-faceted, mature woman, a Wonder Woman to inspire us. Her strengths and weaknesses, her beauty as well as her wisdom, her mothering nature as well as her her warrior energy, and her kick-arse sexuality, these are all the reasons I love Wonder Woman and proudly wear her symbol on my wrist!

Any woman with any inkling of these characteristics in herself is a Wonder Woman.

Men's Day

Visiting Germany I learned of one of their cultural traditions which kind of makes the mind boggle as to its roots. On Ascension Day, one of the many Christian holidays that western European countries celerbate by taking the day off - again - the Germans do something a bit different. Every year Ascension Day is also known as Men's Day (Herrentag), and all the men get hold of little wooden pull-along trolleys, like the things kids put lego in, fill them with bottles of drink and cans of beer, and walk around getting drunk.

Fascinating.

The German who told me about it said they go for walks in the woods and then get drunk. I'm not sure what the significance is of going into the woods, but somehow that't the only bit that was suggestive of any tradition. Searching for something more meaningful, I imagined an old tradition of German peasants taking the religious day, the day Jesus's soul rose to heaven, and walking in the woods together in some clan-like brotherhood, reflecting upon their spiritual lives. Or perhaps even a pagan tradition, where the men walked together as warrior hunters, in the spring lit woods, where life is teeming, orienting themsleves for the summer, finding where the animals have been nesting, banding together as brothers, teaching young boys the ways of being a man, and connecting with the fertile spring energy in nature to bring home their mating energy to their women.

I liked the images that came to mind, but my German friend assured me it's just as excuse to start drinking at 10am and keep going all day.

He was telling me this while we were watching a young muscular man dressed in a pink tutu, pink fairy wings and a pink crown, being forced to sweep confetti and streamers and other messy things from the steps, while his friends continued to strew them about, making his task impossible. Every few minutes another swig was taken from a bottle of spirits (this was on the university grounds at 5pm) and another beer can was opened. Apparently on your 30th birthday if you are not married this is what you are subjected to. Another old tradition with unknown roots - surely in this day and age most of the 30 year olds aren't married?? Or is it kept alive because of the excuse it is to drink and make fun of friends?

I asked if there was a Women's Day as well. Apparently there is, but there's no drinking tradition that goes with it. My friend couldn't really tell me much about it - he knew more about International Women's Day on March 8th.

So what to make of it? There is actually an International Men's Day on Nov 19th to celebrate the accomplishments and contributions of men to their communities and familes, improve gender equality, mens and boys health. Awesome stuff if you ask me, but not many people know about it. Perhaps they should combine this with the pink tutu and the drinking and the walking in the woods and there might be some more enthusiasm for it.

The dating game

My sister goddess in training, who is American, is familiar with the "dating game". I am convinced it's a cultural thing. I'm Australian and we don't really date. We meet up for drinks or go out to dinner, but we're pretty quick to decide if it's going somewhere or not, or if we just want a casual fling. There's not a lot of the giggly "what's it mean and should I call him or should I wait for him to text me and how flirtatious should I be???" I mean, we did some of that as teenagers, discovering what the game was about, but there doesn't seem to be the same extended etiquette and rules of the game as there seem to be among my American friends.

And the Dutch certianly don't date! They spend time together in groups and if you like someone enough you basically end up kissing and/or going to bed with them. And if a relationship develops it's usually with the proviso that they're just seeing each other, but even after half a year there's no way they would refer to each other as girlfriend, boyfriend, partner, whatever. It's just someone they're seeing. And who makes them giddy with happiness. But nothing serious.

And then if they move in together they will inevitably both keep their own apartments as a safety net, a back door option should things get too serious or not serious enough. It will be years before they give up their ticket to singledom.

And so when I was asked out for drinks by an American the other day I was flattered, and ensured he had my number, and hoped he would contact me, but when he did I found myself entering a new world. The dating game! I had to ask my American goddess in training how to go about this - we have only had sms contact and I have been cautious about sending texts which are too flirtatious. But I find myself wanting to send funny responses to his playful remarks. And should I rspond straight away or leave it a few hours or a day? And is he doing the same thing - deliberately waiting a day to respond? Or is he just busy at work?

And why am I even asking these questions? It seems so adolescent to me. I am entering a phase of life that is all about delving in to the shadow, discovering what lies beneath, waking the goddess who sleeps within, going to places which are emotionally and spiritually unfamilair territory in order to grow and fulfil who I am. It is a delicate and profound journey. Is this a time in which to play the dating game? Is it not a time to be focused on the inner woman and just reject sexual attention all together?

My sister goddess in training suggested this is another opportunity to give up knowing and get out of my head. I don't have to know that this person is NOT the one I will have something meaningful and special with. I don't have to know this is not the time. I don't have to know what it is to be in the presence of others who are attractive and attracted to me. I can explore, be vulnerable, discover some new territory. And maybe even just have some fun.

It feels so strange. I thought my journey of being vulnerable was only to be in sacred areas of my life. Going out for drinks and laughing and flirting and maybe even "making out", as she suggested, feels like it's superficial and not sacred and not a place to be vulnerable. But she also suggested it's like a playing field. What is it to be vulnerable in different contexts?

And then another thing comes up - what about mixing my professional world with my personal? Having had the revelation that I can be an Amazon warrior in the world of my career and the world of international law, and then take off my armour and lay down my sword as I enter my home space when I can be the nurturing, gentle women within, and be vulnerable and alllow myself to be taken care of, it seems dangerous to mix the two. This "date" (if that's what it is!!) is with a man I met through a professional contact, and is working on a project I would love to be involved in professionally. It's an important new networking arena and a potential to move my expertise into the practitioners world. Should I expose my personal self and my vulnerable self to a person who works in the world I want to be a warrior in?

I think my sister goddess in training is right. If nothing else this is a time to get out of my head, let go of analysing, let go of needing to know, come back to my intution and even there, let go of looking for answers. That's what being vulnerable is about too...being vulnerable towards myself and just embarking on the journey.

So should I text him or not...? ;-)

Alice in Wonderland

I watched Tim Burton's 3D film tonight with three wonderful ladies and we all enjoyed the fantasy of it and the 3D effects.

The thing I found most exciting, though, was the girl discovering herself as a warroir woman in the central character. The Mad Hatter said in disappointment that she used to be much more...much. She had lost her muchness. Alice was afraid to be The Alice and kept denying she was the one. Eventually after encouragement and appeal, she took on the challenge of recovering her muchness, making her own path, and slaying the Jabberwocky, knowing when she stood there with sword in hand, she would be standing alone.

She was afraid to claim herself, to grow up, to face her inner demon. But once she realised all she had to do was remember her future, and declare who she is, it appeared inevitable. And she just had to believe the impossible was possible - simple, really, considering the other impossible things around her.

I loved that in the final climactic scenes she was dressed in armour, a tribute to Joan of Arc and other women warrirors who have gone before her. She didn't have to be another big-busted, hyper-sexualised cartoon-like heroine. She was a woman in armour facing her demon, and though she was scared and though it hurt, she fought to the death. And then returned to peace.

Thank you Tim Burton for providing us with a narrative that returns to the magic and inspiration of Lewis Carrol - to believe the impossible, to go with the madness and magic of life - and at the same time for providing us with an Alice who is a true heroine, turning within to find the answers when she is looking for who she is, reminding us to follow the path by carving out our own and following the road less travelled. And doing so as an independent yet vulnerable young woman, feminine and strong all at once.

Masculine and feminine energy

A friend of mine has a body of work called the Balance of Power, and some of what he talks about is the natural feminine energy and the natural masculine energy. Something in me resists this dichotomy, as it sounds essentialist and teeters on gender stereotyping. But something profound occured to me as I pondered an image he had described to me - a revelation about balancing my own energies.

The image was of a warrior man, "standing at the gate" of the village to protect it from whatever or whomever wants to come in. A battler, a fighter, a man holding his sword and shield. And it is for this warrior to learn to "return to the village hut", to put down the sword and shield and come into the hut to scoop up his child and caress his wife gently. To bring the warrior energy into the home is to bring a potential of imbalance, and to threaten the expression of natural energies.

I cannot stand the thought of "natural feminine energy" being reduced to the homemaker, and the "natural masculine energy" being simplified as the warrior without there being the lover as well. But it occurred to me this is a resistance I have because I have often struggled with what it is to be feminine while still being strong/independent/career-oriented. Does being the one have to mean sacrificing the other? Does being feminine mean being less powerful in the work place, and does being a powerful woman mean being overbearing in the area of love?

I am not by nature a woman who is satisfied being the home-maker unless I can also express the fight that is in me and bring that energy to what I am committed to in international law. But it was always a bit of a struggle with my previous partner over what role we each played at home. He wanted to be the provider and I wanted him to be, but I didn't want to be dependent, nor to give up my ambitions in law. When we spoke about having children we had such different visions, and he felt I wanted him to be a house-husband and I felt he wanted me to be a house-wife and neither of us wanted that.

As I have embraced discovering my feminine side and exploring that with other women in many ways, I have enjoyed going in to the softer energy, but I find it confusing what to do with my more boisterous, aggressive energy. I don't want to supress that which is also a part of me just because it is deemed to be "un-feminine".

Then it dawned on me - the lesson the warrior has to learn in coming home is a lesson I could learn as well. I'm not standing at the gate as the masculine warrior, but I am out on the periphery, taking on some battles as an amazon warrior, the Wonder Woman, the Niké, the Kali, the Athena, the Bellona! A woman is warrior in a different way from a man, but a she-wolf has that energy in her too.

The lesson to learn is about bringing a different energy into the home at the end of the day. The warrior goddess, or the she-wolf, has her role to play out there in the world, and she has something else to tap into in the home. That is where the nurturing energy can come in, without it having to mean becoming a house-wife. It's about bringing balance again, and I actually find it inspiring to think I can really go into that energy in my home, knowing that whatever other energy I have, has it's place in the world as well. Nothing has to be supressed or compensated. In fact my gentler feminine energies have a place to flourish. And it takes practice to learn to put down the weapons and take off the armour at the door and bring the mother energy at a different level into the home.

And I guess if I can do that and thereby bring balance, then there is space for the man I share my life with to be in his masculine energy in the home, and be in balance as well. And this doesn't have to take anything away from my power or freedom to express different aspects of myself out in the world. In fact it means I can invite a man into my life with whom I can be vulnerable and whose masculine energy I can nurture. Revelation!!!