The Way of the Conscious Warrior: A Handbook For 21st Century Men
304
The Way of the Conscious Warrior: A Handbook For 21st Century Men
304Paperback
-
PICK UP IN STORE
Your local store may have stock of this item.
Available within 2 business hours
Related collections and offers
Overview
Product Details
| ISBN-13: | 9781785358746 |
|---|---|
| Publisher: | Collective Ink |
| Publication date: | 10/01/2019 |
| Pages: | 304 |
| Product dimensions: | 5.55(w) x 8.40(h) x 0.68(d) |
About the Author
Read an Excerpt
CHAPTER 1
A Brief History of the Men's Movement
The modern men's movement is not, and has never been, anything unified or consistent in doctrine or tone. Birthed in the late 1960s and 1970s mainly in the UK and the USA, there have been, essentially, three elements within it. One has consisted of a pro-feminist men's movement, which has typically involved men gathering to look at the ways in which traditional masculine values have been inappropriately used to the detriment of women (and men). This group in general supports feminism both ideologically and, at times, practically (by, for example, participating in feminist activism). It has been involved in the attempt to deconstruct patriarchy in its more negative sense, and as such has been geared toward the overall support and empowerment of women. The anti-sexist men's movement began in the early 1970s in the USA, but it was not until the early 1980s that it became organized, taking the name National Organization for Changing Men in 1983. This name was changed to the National Organization for Men against Sexism (NOMAS) in 1990. They promote anti-racism, pro-feminism, gay-affirmation, and enhancing men's lives, and are still active as of 2018.
The second strand within the men's movement began in the mid-1970s with an anti-feminist approach — that is, it was largely reactionary — and holds as its position the consolidation of traditional masculine qualities and a vigilance against aggressive feminism. This second element of the men's movement has something of a connection with the so-called seduction community, although probably most men who participate in 'art of pick-up' seminars and teachings are not especially concerned with the sociology of gender issues. Nevertheless, some elements of the seduction community do teach, however crudely, methods that are not concerned simply with manipulation but also with the enhancement of certain masculine qualities.
The third element within the men's movement is usually referred to as the 'mythopoetic' men's movement, mainly because it has an intellectual and literary aspect as well as an interest in the growth of men as masculine individuals. The mythopoetic men's movement is concerned not just with the safeguarding of masculinity, but with the overall growth of men as human beings as well. It had its genesis mainly in the early 1980s. The term 'mythopoetic' was coined by the psychologist Shepherd Bliss in 1986; it derives from mythopoesis, which means 're-mythologizing', and in this context, 'revisioning masculinity for our time', utilizing myth, poetry, and ritual in its workshops for the general public.
The mythopoetic branch holds in common with the antifeminist men's movement the fact that it began largely in reaction to the second-wave feminism of the 1970s. Early pioneers and champions of the mythopoetic men's movement have been figures such as author and mythologist Michael Meade, poet Robert Bly, psychologist Shepherd Bliss, psychoanalyst Robert Moore, and mythologist Douglas Gillette. These men in turn drew inspiration from earlier well-known figures such as Jungian psychotherapists James Hillman, James Hollis, and Robert Johnson, from C.G. Jung himself (for psychoanalytic insights), and Joseph Campbell (for mythology). Bly's work (Iron John, 1990) put the men's movement on the map, bringing on both admiration and ridicule from the public, and remaining for over a year on the New York Times bestseller list (it eventually sold hundreds of thousands of copies). This book used the 1820 German Grimm brothers' myth of Iron Hans as a vehicle to comment on masculinity, although to be fair the method had been used two decades earlier by Robert Johnson, whose book He (1974) used the twelfth-century Grail mythology of Chretien de Troyes for the same purpose. Johnson's book was much shorter and he did not write with the flair of Bly.
The differences between the pro-feminist and the mythopoetic men's movements has been defined as follows: pro-feminist groups have been more concerned with social and political change and activism, whereas mythopoetic groups have been focused mainly on personal growth; or, pro-feminist men are concerned mainly with the damage wrought by patriarchy on women, whereas mythopoetic men are focused more on the damage caused by patriarchy (and to a lesser extent, feminism) on men. These are rough generalizations of course, and don't apply in many individual cases, but they give a good general overview of what the respective movements tend to focus on.
A great number of communities based on the men's movement have appeared, flourished, and faded (with some surviving) since the 1970s. The 1990s was perhaps the peak period for men's movement workshops and trainings, with popular events going by such names as 'Wild Man Weekend', 'Inner King Training', 'Warrior-Monk', 'Gathering of Men', 'Woodland Passage', 'Spirit Journeys', and (emphasizing initiation) 'Metamorphosis'. Two of the more successful and widespread men's movement communities were the ManKind Project and the Sterling Men's Division. The former, founded in 1985 by Rich Tosi, Bill Kauth, and Ron Hering, was initially called the New Warrior Network and based its ideas mainly on the writings of Bly, Moore, and Gillette. Its motto is 'Changing the World One Man at a Time'. The latter was founded in 1979 by A. Justin Sterling (b. 1944), a maverick sociologist who had originally trained under Werner Erhard in the 1970s.
All these more or less fell under the mythopoetic branch. As for what exactly is done in mythopoetic men's workshops — cynically lampooned by some as gatherings of 'weekend warriors' — these are mostly variations of experiential processes such as circle-sharing (where participants are encouraged to be honest, non-defensive, and non-boasting), ritual initiations, drumming, some emotional-expression exercises (including shadow-work), empowerment exercises, vigorous physical activities, and so on. Theory is usually kept to a minimum; the emphasis is largely on authentic, direct experience and honest communication. Naturally, the skill and experience level of the workshop facilitators influences the quality of the gathering.
In passing it can be noted that the men's movement has also entered the mainstream religious domain. A Christian organization, founded in 1990 by the former American college football coach Bill McCartney (b. 1940), called the Promise Keepers, originated in part as a massive men's support group. Although most of their core principles are religious in tone (obedience to God's word via the Holy Spirit, etc.), of note is their Principle 2: A Promise Keeper is committed to pursuing vital relationships with a few other men, understanding that he needs brothers to help him keep his promises. It would seem God alone is no longer enough. Religious men also need other men.
Essentialism and Feminist Concerns about the Men's Movement
As mentioned in the Introduction, a main argument historically put forth by some male pro-feminist academics against elements of the men's movement is that the whole thing is based too much on essentialism, which in this context is the idea that men and women have essential differences that result in them being so far apart psychologically that separation and 'movements' (for men or women) are not just justified but necessary. The main criticism is that these differences — 'masculinity vs. femininity' being the prime example — are more the product of social constructions, and less of intrinsic differences. Those following the mythopoetic paths are regarded as 'loose essentialists', meaning, they can celebrate their differences with women while at the same time working toward a more integrated and developed sense of what it really means to be a man. The criticism of this is that it allows men to 'have it both ways', to retain the 'moral license' to maintain their character as it is, while at the same time growing in any direction they wish. This idea has been rebutted by leaders within the mythopoetic movement, such as Shepherd Bliss, who in The Politics of Manhood (an anthology of essays mostly critical of the men's movement) responded:
I am not that straw man that some ultra-feminists describe as an 'essentialist'. I do believe that archetypes influence our behavior, but I also believe in the social construction of reality ... it is not either-or, that you either believe in archetypes or the social construction of reality; you can have both-and, unless you are a fundamentalist.
The darker face of essentialism, and the one of most concern to some feminist writers, is the idea that men involved in the men's movement will simply use essentialist ideas to reinforce the very qualities that feminists rail against. The Pagan leader and author Starhawk once put it succinctly: 'Our fear is that the men's movement will do what men have always done, at least since the advent of patriarchy: blame women for their problems and defend their own privileges.'
Speaking personally, based on three decades of involvement in men's work, I can suggest that Starhawk can rest easy. Men's work — certainly the elements of it that I've witnessed — is not party to any effort, however covert, to blame women, much less defend men's privileges. The clear majority of men involved in the men's movement, certainly the mythopoetic branches of it, are there to work on themselves, to improve their lot in life, and to connect with other men. If there are any nefarious plots being hatched in men's groups and inner-work communities against women (much less against feminism), I have yet to see it. Yes, sometimes pain or anger is released, and sometimes this pain or anger is related to a man's relationship with women. But if the group of men at issue is led by any leader or leaders of worthy caliber, wounds are always worked with in the direction of healing, not aggravating or merely assigning blame. It is vital that a man deal with his personal accountability in life; this and related issues are, above all, emphasized in men's meetings, and certainly in the larger, more established mythopoetic groups.
The Patriarchy
To grasp the men's movement, feminism, and related issues, it's useful to have some understanding of the term 'patriarchy'. The word literally means 'rule of the father' (from the Latin words patria, 'lineage'; pater, 'father'; and Greek arkho, 'I rule'). Since the 1970s the idea of patriarchy has taken on connotations beyond its original literal meaning (and came, in many respects, to replace the term 'male chauvinism'). A patriarchal culture is now implied to be a culture where men carry greater significance than women in the domain of politics and the power structures that run things and do so to the limitation and unfair detriment of women. Sociologist Sylvia Walby proposed the following general outline to define patriarchy:
1. The state: women are unlikely to have formal power and representation
2. The household: women are more likely to do the housework and raise the children
3. Violence: women are more prone to being abused
4. Paid work: women are likely to be paid less
5. Sexuality: women's sexuality is more likely to be treated negatively
6. Culture: women are more misrepresented in media and popular culture
Evidence for patriarchal culture is found stretching back to the beginnings of recorded history (over 5,000 years ago), although the evidence is not consistent. For example, some women in ancient Egypt appeared to have a measure of freedom and autonomy unknown to women in ancient Greece. Greek and Hebrew cultures of antiquity were, in general, heavily patriarchal. Aristotle was noted for his views on the superiority of men over women in the intellectual, moral, and physical domains. He regarded women as inhabiting a level between that of child and adult and proclaimed that it was natural for men to rule women mainly because (according to him) men can balance their passions with reason, whereas a woman is dominated by passions. (Aristotle's views influenced the Catholic Church to some extent and its resultant tradition of excluding women from the priesthood. He was also a key mentor of Alexander the Great, whose policies impacted much of the civilized world during his brief but spectacular rule.)
Different theories abound as to the history of patriarchy. The popular New Age view that a matriarchy was dominant on the planet prior to the age of the patriarchy is not supported by anthropologists; most rather find evidence for a rough egalitarianism prior to the advent of obvious patriarchy some 5,000–6,000 years ago. One theory that has some credibility is that significant climate changes — leading to widespread famine — of 6,000 years ago resulted in the appearance of vast tracts of desert and wastelands that required men to take the lead in exploration, hunting, and warfare to safeguard and feed villages and communities, thus giving men political and social power as well.
However it came about, patriarchy in the classical sense of 'rule of the father' has dominated most of civilization (East, Central, and West) for the past few thousand years. Isolated cases of political rule by females have certainly existed, but even in these cases such women commonly presided over male militaries and courts while being advised by male courtiers or commanders.
Patriarchy has, to a large extent, been propagated and maintained by the culture of war, and the need to train soldiers to enforce the rule of leaders. This culture of violence has arguably changed little throughout recorded history. As Starhawk put it:
The problem with men is not, as Robert Bly suggests, that male initiatory process has broken down. The problem is that it's working all too well to shape young boys and girls into the type of men and women required by a society dominated by war ... war requires soldiers ... not inner warriors or archetypal warriors or spiritual warriors, but soldiers: weapon-like, obedient to their handlers, and unthinkingly, unfeelingly brutal to their victims.
The difficulty with sweeping critiques of the culture of warfare is that it too easily slips into a general condemnation of masculine aggression and facility with violence in general. And yet, righteous warriors — many of whom were brutally fierce fighters who were, yes, involved in violent scenarios — have been as common in history as have marauding tyrants. If the Allies of World War II had not pushed back and ultimately defeated the aggression of the Axis powers, the world would be a very different one today. Were the fire-bombings of German cities late in the war, or the nuclear destruction of Japanese cities in 1945, truly necessary for the victory of the Allies? Perhaps not, but then again, perhaps they were. Hindsight may be 20-20 but it is also frequently pointless. All that is known for sure is that life on this planet, and the history of civilization, has been darkened by the specter of mortality and the primitive requirements of survival — a survival that has not been possible without the application, from time to time, of force.
A significant critique lodged by pro-feminist writers against the modern men's movement, including the mythopoetic branch, is that it fails to identify the patriarchy hidden within the glorification of admirable masculine mythic figures and legends. From this perspective, the modern men's movement is seen as simply a rehash of patriarchy in a different form — an attempt to keep it alive, to maintain the status quo, in the face of the growing empowerment of women.
Many of these critiques suffer from a lack of direct experience of the inner workings of men's growth trainings, workshops, and groups. The critiques of male pro-feminist scholars tend to show this deficiency. While there is obviously a place for academic criticism, I do wish that some of the (male) critics would partake in a typical men's gathering themselves to see and experience firsthand what goes on. Some have, in fact, done this, but one usually gets the feeling that they participated more as a journalist to compile field notes in which to later marshal their observational critiques. One can indeed participate in a men's growth gathering and not really participate at the same time.
In many ways the history of the so-called men's movement is the history of the struggle of men to stay connected, to engage in legitimate relationship with each other. The irony of intellectual criticisms of men's movement gatherings is that they are formulated from a place of observation, not participation — and yet it has been this detached observational perspective that has been a problem behind the history of so many failed relationships: between individuals, yes, but also between organizations, nations, and religions. Modern science has its basis in objective observation, and in the realm of science this is essential. But observation without participation has been more problematic when it comes to one race, religion, culture, or nation attempting to understand another — or one man attempting to understand another man. The psychological and spiritual basis of the men's movement — at least the so-called mythopoetic branch, and related branches — has been the effort to help men be less isolated in their minds, their prejudices, and their egocentric views, and to truly come to understand one another. This is a noble and worthy project.
(Continues…)
Excerpted from "The Way of the Conscious Warrior"
by .
Copyright © 2018 P.T. Mistlberger.
Excerpted by permission of John Hunt Publishing Ltd..
All rights reserved. No part of this excerpt may be reproduced or reprinted without permission in writing from the publisher.
Excerpts are provided by Dial-A-Book Inc. solely for the personal use of visitors to this web site.
Table of Contents
Preface 1
Introduction: The Men's Movement Revisited 3
Part 1 The Dilemma of the Twenty-First-Century Western Man 15
Chapter 1 A Brief History of the Men's Movement 16
Chapter 2 Twenty-First-Century Challenges: The Feminized Man, the Distracted Man, and Related Issues 25
Part 2 Warriors, Junkyard Dogs, and Popular Figures 59
Chapter 3 A Brief History of Warrior Cultures: Part I 60
Chapter 4 A Brief History of Warrior Cultures: Part II 86
Chapter 5 The Dark Side of the Male Psyche: Secrets and Junkyard Dogs 102
Chapter 6 Mythology and Revisioning the Code of the Warrior 134
Part 3 The Way of the Conscious Warrior 169
Chapter 7 The Code of the Conscious Warrior 170
Chapter 8 Shadow Work: Integrating the Beast 183
Chapter 9 Clarity of Thought and Meditation 191
Chapter 10 Guidelines for Intimate Relationship 217
Chapter 11 Magnum Opus, the Mature Masculine, and the Art of Decisiveness 221
Chapter 12 The Shaman 233
Chapter 13 Last Battle of the Conscious Warrior: Mastering the Mind (Enlightenment) 262
Notes 277
Suggested Reading 284
Acknowledgments 286
About the Author 287