[-empyre-] the use of gender polarization?

["Damien Everett" <damien.everett@rmit.edu.au>]

uh oh, the dreaded "F" word...

she opens her moist lips in a grin,
seeking to extinguish the male fire in her slime...
to consume all inside her dark embrace,
and yet reject the bastard child.

ok I'm ready to be flamed at the phallic stake, I thought I might share some reflections on this matter in hope of salvation.

I can understand why a lot of men when they hear talk of feminism either flee for their life with knees tightly pressed together or seek to don shining armor and wage battle for their righteous cause (although their visors might obscure their vision somewhat).

art has often sought to provoke people, if people had no reaction to what was presented it has failed its purpose... and if people so get so offended they switch off from the actual message, this seems like another failure of communication.

I'm sure a lot of us have met radical feminists who blindly consider all men to be travesties of "mother" nature,  requiring immediate castration, removal of the tongue and eye-balls, and a torcherous exile. They seem to only consider men as sexually obsessed vultures, just looking for the nearest piece of meat to pillage.

Although there is some biological justification to this theory, these extremists seem oblivious to the fact that we men also have a heart, soul and feelings. Traditionally it has been generally unacceptable for men to show such "weakness". As a result of this cultural programming, this emotional side has been distorted and repressed, compounding the divide between the sexes.

Feminists seem to seek to empower "abused and repressed women" in what seems to be a divisive paradigm aimed at restoring the balance(to the "us women" side). it is easy to project gender biased perspectives upon things (seems like everyone else does),  though after a while this becomes a frustrating distraction from deeper truth and unity.

people make assumptions about gender roles, it is hard to be free from cultural programming, any distinction between this and our genetic programming is extremely difficult as they interconnect in fuzzy dimensions.

 statements such as "it is a comonplace that women see the big picture while men see the details" are untrue and not helpful... they only serve to further implant gender role distinctions... was Einstein only able to see the details?

I've known women that in one breath scream injustice at the objectification of the female body and in the next delight in the manipulative power of their own sexuality.

A lot of women make too many assumptions about men. It annoys me that a lot of the time when I look at a design on a woman's tee-shirt she immediately assumes I'm just trying to examine her breasts... or when I start chatting to a girl in a pub and she assumes I want to pick her up... or just because I enjoy being in my body at a party means I'm trying to be sexy/sleazy and want every female to gaze worshipfully at my crotch (well ok, maybe sometimes ;).

according to Freud sexuality is at the root of our consciousness, which is why I prefer Jung as he manages to transcend the chains of this sexualised "prison" in a more enlightened way.

I can appreciate that I don't fully understand the scope and depth of the cyber/feminist movement...  cyberfeminism seems to be about creating safe spaces excluding masculinity, which is fair enough on some levels as a lot of males are pretty messed up,  perhaps we should respectfully accept and celebrate our differences?

or would we be better served by cyber(post)humanist manifesto?

Don't misunderstand me, I bow down reverentially before the sacred c*nt,
 may I be truly worthy to interface with you and receive your blessings and wisdom.

love, peace, harmony;
damien