Vagina Dentata

A quick overview of some of the works & perspectives of Dambudzo Marechera

2012-02-11T22:40:00.000-08:00

A quick overview of some of the works & perspectives of Dambudzo Marechera

The past

2012-02-10T15:57:00.000-08:00

THIS WAS THE PAST

This was just the baseline of the underlying problem I had to face: the inability of my father, after migration (and perhaps before) to differentiate me from himself. There was another level to it, apart from the inability of my father to discern that I was a different person from him. He was also reversing the parent-child relationship, so that I was responsible for him, for his failures, his moody outbursts and so on. At times, he was a two year old yelling his hostilities at a figure he took to be his mother.

Then there were also the problems brought on by cultural shock, loss of identity and stress — all factors of migration. I was not behaving like a right-wing female, as my father had anticipated I ought to be doing. This seemed like a betrayal to him — although one expressed in angry, aggressive attitudes, rather than words.

Then there was the fact that the rest of my family were rather right wing — and religious to differing degrees. They bought into my father’s cover-up story that I was an unpleasant person who required heavy berating and control to set me on the right path.

So, there were many layers of difficulty for me, brought on by my father’s very strange early relationship with his mother.

And, people didn’t believe me that there was anything odd about my father. They inevitably bought his patriarchal line that fathers are good and caring -- and upheld a view that there was something wrong with me.

And when I was bullied at work, this appeared like confirmation to my father that there was something wrong with me that required ever more severe correction.

Neuter your pets

2012-01-31T18:04:00.000-08:00

Swimming in the river at Dwellingup

2012-01-03T20:04:00.000-08:00

Human Emotional Disorder

2012-01-01T01:19:00.000-08:00

STAY SANE AND SAVAGE Gender activism, intellectual shamanism

It cuts both ways: analysis

2011-12-07T15:38:00.001-08:00

As has always been the case, amateurs (and indeed on some rare occasions) “professionals” alike tend to analyse my identity, rather than anything I say or do. It’s totally the identity which signifies something to them,that is overarching. Then they try to reform my identity and straighten it into conformity with whatever is average, boring, quiet. In Australia, most intellectuals and everyday people are Procrustean thinkers in one way or another. It must be the boring, British heritage. There is also a lot of lower class Puritanism here and many have the guilty conscious of their grandparents who were sent into criminal exile and are just abiding their time in a hateful place until they die and can go and receive their reward in the sky. There’s an extreme disconnect between many people and the natural environment of the Australian bush, which I put down to this original hatred.

Boxing for fitness class 7 DECEMBER 2011

2011-12-06T20:19:00.000-08:00

enrage

2011-12-06T15:22:00.000-08:00

If one must consider the foundational issue, the one that may have developed before the age of three, then rage is it for me. Frustration about communication and not being taken seriously is it. Perhaps I found at that age that I was smarter than my parents? At least, I required communication that was more straight-forward and less vacillating and less deceptive than they were prepared to give.

When my rage reached its height, due to its severe repression and being bottled up until my mid twenties, I caught sight of it at last, and realised I had something akin to an explosive device under my skin that had to be detonated effectively without me destroying myself. That was when I alighted upon the idea that I could destroy other people with it. I joined the army. The solution was well-intentioned, but I wasn’t suited to the army due to my low attention span. My visual memory is very poor indeed, especially when fatigued.

I do martial arts now and have a lifestyle that affords me a high degree of independence. I’m not a hostile person — so long as I can vent my energy by joking around. However, if this safety valve of joking gets stopped up for long periods of time, the situation could become very dangerous again. Fortunately, my husband has the same character structure and is a committed joker.

A quick overview of some of the works & perspectives of Dambudzo Marechera

2011-10-17T01:18:00.001-07:00

http://unsanesafe.blogspot.com/2007/06/ethics-of-transgression-in-black.html

Jennifer Armstrong: Minus the Morning

2011-10-09T18:45:00.001-07:00

Self defence training, Mutare

2011-09-24T22:43:00.000-07:00

BREAK FREE

2011-09-24T17:52:00.001-07:00

Opposing philosophical paradigms: identity politics & shamanism

2011-09-06T22:25:00.001-07:00

In a fundamental philosophical and ethical sense, shamanism is radically at odds with Western identity politics. Those who are heavily imbued with a philosophy of identity politics will rarely understand shamanistic ideas. That's because the parts of the mind that could be engaged with shamanistic concepts and experiences are already occupied with alternative concepts from a very different paradigm.

A way to understand how shamanism differs from identity politics is in terms of its philosophy of redemption. To be redeemed is to be freed from various vices that afflict us and drag us down.

THE IDEOLOGICAL STRUCTURE OF IDENTITY POLITICS

The term, "vice", has an entirely different resonance in terms of identity politics as compared to shamanism. In general, identity politics borrows much from Platonism to drive its system of redemption. As such, it invokes an equivalence between moral goodness and an ascetic's embrace of difficult truths:

That which constrains idealists of knowledge, this unconditional will to truth, is faith in the ascetic ideal itself even if as an unconscious imperative — don’t be deceived about that — it is faith in a metaphysical value, the absolute value of truth, sanctioned and guaranteed by this ideal alone (it stands or falls with this ideal). F Nietzsche, Genealogy of Morals, III, 25

As Nietzsche points out in the above passage, there are those who hold that truth has an absolute value. It is considered to be an indispensable means for moral redemption. To embrace the truth is, in essence, to be redeemed, according to the formulation. The reason why such redemption is guaranteed should be obvious. Implicitly, a monotheistic deity is invoked. This deity stands behind reality acting as guarantor that if one only embraces "the truth", one will also improve morally and thus acquire redemption as one of those who embraces "the Good".

Thus, identity politics is based on a Platonic formulation that implicitly promises redemption in the form of higher moral standing for those who choose an ascetic's path by embracing difficult truths.

The particular difficult "truth" that Westerners urge other Westerners to embrace, as they move along the ascetic's path, is the link between whiteness and oppression. There are various levels of sophistication or amateur reasoning with regard to this link. In some cases, one's whiteness is implicated in oppression by means of an argument that raises some genuine historical facts. In other instances, the equation made is much more essentialistic, so that fashionable modes of speech come into play far more than intellectual analysis. Identity politics thus takes the form whereby one is always guaranteed to win any rhetorical battle -- either by posing as "holier than thou" or by demanding that others recognise their status as "oppressors". Once one has learned to play this game, no matter what else one may do in life, one's morally superior status will hardly be in doubt.

The path to redemption -- through admitting one's guilt or "sin" -- is hereby made into a path to power. Submit oneself to the truth by admitting one's guilt and thou shalt gain moral and social justification. The ascetic's goal is to gain recognition of his or her righteousness within the larger body politic: his, or her society. The very fact that this goal is within reach indicates the relatively elevated, at least middle class status, of those who advocate for a system of morality based on identity.

THE PRACTICE OF SHAMANISM

Shamanism is a spiritual and self-defensive technique of those who have been denied recourse to moral means of self elevation. Alternatively, it is practiced by those who find a moral approach to self elevation to be deceptive and worthy of denouncing.

In the first category are those who have learned to escape the draconian pressures of society by accessing the deeper recesses of their minds. They escape into "other worlds", discover artistic means of distraction or they "shape shift" to become something other than they are in the ever watchful eyes of the oppressors. They are the spiritual and artistic innovators of the world -- hard diamonds, out of the force of devastating pressures.

The philosophical innovators who adopt a shamanistic line and manner are a different group. Bataille and Nietzsche are two who see the futility of the ascetic ideal as a means to self-redemption. Primarily, one seeks to redeems not others, but oneself, via the ascetic means: the self-flagellation of those Westerners who opposed the colonial regime of Rhodesia stops short from the wearing of a hair shirt to protest Robert Mugabe's actions in Matabeleland (known by those on the ground as Gukurahundi) -- and, in any case, the violence continues, even when it is not perpetuated by "whites".

The identity of the perpetrators of world violence continues to shift, thus history relativises the moral positions of those who would rely too heavily upon essentialising identity in order to effect their own redemption (and, perhaps although not inevitably, that of a few select others).

Meanwhile, is is the shaman alone who has enough insight to proclaim, "I am not my historical identity, but something more than that! And, IF I am not yet something more than that, it is the desire of my entire spirit to become more than my historical position has made me out to be!"

Thus, those who are severely oppressed and those who are philosophical spirits join hands to affirm the necessity for every human being to find redemption in mastering the historical time rather than being mastered by it.

To accept that one is made by history and to pay recompense for that is one thing: to blast beyond the limitations of identity and those of the ascetic ideal, is entirely another.

STAY SANE AND SAVAGE: The core principles of shamanism, Nietzsche, Bataille and self-transformation

2011-09-03T16:45:00.000-07:00

STAY SANE AND SAVAGE: The core principles of shamanism, Nietzsche, Bataille and self-transformation

Shamanism requires an existential encounter with the void!

2011-09-01T23:15:00.001-07:00

Emotional and intellectual vitality could be radically increased through shamanistic practices. The means to achieve this is you must face the void of the soul, where there is an absence of meaningfulness. By means of encountering such an existential threat to ego, one can often see those aspects of the real self that one's conformity to others' expectations has rendered invisible to you. Real shamanism works on you at the level of an existential threat, forcing a deeper investigation of one's inner resources.

There are degrees and kinds of shamanism. Nietzsche's intellectual shamanism is relatively deep, just as his experience of an existential "abyss" is central to his work. All the same, if had experienced an even deeper sense of the void, he may not have been so keen to reinforce radical gender polarities along the lines he did. He would have seen the aspects of "femininity" that he condemned in women as being part and part of his own psyche.

Bataille, it seems, had much more of an intuitive sense of the possibility of going further, by means of "excess" which would break the existing boundaries of bourgeois consciousness.

The problem with any contemporary "New Age" shamanism is that it seeks to increase vitality on the basis of a prior acceptance of bourgeois norms concerning identity. The need to make shamanism commercially viable, according to Capitalist and consumerist mores, leads to the kind of "product" of learning that is all too reassuring in terms of the status quo.

An enemy of shamanistic knowledge is the pervasive bourgeois ideology that we cannot change our essential characteristics but only work to refine and improve the ones we have. (This bourgeois pessimism is very pronounced, for instance, in the work of Lacan. His work proclaims, perhaps truthfully, that all are in, one way or another, pathological under the force of Civilization. Yet his approach also effectively closes the door against any non-civilized means for recovering one's sense of wholeness. There is no void in which one may discover one's identity, within psychoanalysis. Rather, there the muted authoritarianism of the analyst's couch.)

Such bourgeois pessimism is (of course) also found in writers like Freud. He views the state of discontent with civilization as such, as pathological. Nietzsche effectively reversed this valuation by holding that civilization was itself an illness caused by the propensity to suffer too much from consciousness, at the expense of "instinct".

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

STAY SANE AND SAVAGE: The shamanistic approach to knowledge necessitates risk

2011-08-31T00:21:00.000-07:00

STAY SANE AND SAVAGE: The shamanistic approach to knowledge necessitates risk

Boxing for fitness class 31 August 2011

2011-08-30T22:21:00.000-07:00

STAY SANE AND SAVAGE: Shamanistic initiation: what it does and does not do

2011-08-30T22:05:00.000-07:00

STAY SANE AND SAVAGE: Shamanistic initiation: what it does and does not do

misconstructions of shamanism

2011-06-15T22:45:00.001-07:00

· Pylon Jigme

Ah, fearless feeling. Make friends with all the emotions and layers of ego. Progress is not minimizing the murky stuff and maximizing the admirable stuff. Progress is authentically becoming aware of all the layers without judgment or fear. Yes! I am the greedy death-mongering capitalist. I am the weak-minded addict who cannot kick the habits of consuming industry's products. Yes, I am the shallow, self righteous bastard who thinks I've evolved because I learned the language of social activism. Now that is clear, I stand unafraid of my many layered self, ready to act from my expanding heart and internal mission. : )

44 minutes ago · Like

Jennifer Armstrong Haha.

43 minutes ago · Like

Jennifer Armstrong Well, I'm not entirely sure that this is progress. That is more like premature self-satisfaction, perhaps.

42 minutes ago · Like

Pylon Jigme Can you fight within the dualism. Struggle against patriarchy, for instance, without becoming it's own antithesis (mirrored reflection)? For, indeed, that which you resist, persists.

35 minutes ago · Like

Jennifer Armstrong Yeah, but you don't need to fight within metaphysical dualism. At the same time, you don't need to collapse yourself into a self-embracing narcissism, as indicated in your sentences above. The dualism you enter is between yourself and your self. http://www.lexido.com/EBOOK_TEXTS/THUS_SPOKE_ZARATHUSTRA_.aspx?S=18

32 minutes ago · Like

Jennifer Armstrong ‎...but of course, if you are superficial, you will interpret shamanistic injunctions superficially (and narcissistically) -- which is why Bataille's writing is deliberately ambiguous so as to lure all simple-minded narcissists to their death.

31 minutes ago · Like

Pylon Jigme

‎~my personal heart meditation~
Phase 1: admit that all that is in the world is also in me. Phase 2: admit that none of us can completely avoid entanglement with systemic murkiness. Phase 3: feel inside your belly the connection you have with all that is. Phase 4:know that some practices/behaviors Serve the self/whole better than others. Phase 5: know that all practices/behaviors have consequences and whatever you think or do is "practicing something" and "manifesting something". Phase 6: after practicing on the mountain top, do not stroll into the valley and slay the villagers. Phase 7: trust unified emergence. All of us are scout ants looking for the food source that will sustain the ant hill. As a whole, we will find the path. If we separate our hill into factions, we also separate ourselves within.

13 minutes ago · Like

Jennifer Armstrong Ok. I'm not sure that has anything to do with intellectual shamanism, but it is a way of living which might serve to suit. I don't feel things particularly that way.

8 minutes ago · Like

Jennifer Armstrong Yours sounds like a programme for moral propriety, moderation and nurturing self-awareness to the point of enhancing niceness.

8 seconds ago · Like

A response to some provocative questions about 'contemporary shamanism'

2011-06-15T20:55:00.000-07:00

Jennifer Armstrong: I derived the idea of contemporary shamanism as a solution to bourgeois modes of consciousness; especially within Western culture (I'm not sure if there is a non-Western mode of consciousness that is properly bourgeois. The French revolution and its anti-aristocratic concept of progressivism is properly European, rather than deriving from other continents. The 'bourgeois revolution' per se engendered a particular psychological disposition and mode of consciousness that splits the mind and creates internal self-alienation.) But, let me go through and see if I can draw any relationships between the other spiritual traditions you have mentioned. I confess that I was not familiar with Malidoma Some or Fela Kuti before now – they are both very interesting.

>Contemporary Shamanic death – like “being hit by the 20th century train” or “coming home with a knife in your back” (Marechera-style) is an intriguing term. I would like to understand what you mean by it in reference to five other integrating experiences. How are they different/similar?

>1. Traditional Shamanic death (Malidoma Some – for instance)

My research has led me to suppose that shamanistic "death" is in fact a condition of shamanistic rebirth – and actually in terms of the innate psychological mechanisms that are activated, they are the same. I think, therefore, that traditional shamanism tapped into the knowledge that ego death was a process that invited (laid the ground for) spiritual rebirth. Perhaps not all experiences of ego death are productive. Some experiences may be so devastating that one does not recover from them – but in the case where one does, the condition that is bestowed is that of shamanistic initiation. One has learned a thing or two from the experience and has become wiser – although not in any tangible or intellectually obvious sense. It's more of an ontological shift – as subtle (but decisive) difference in one's sense of personality and identity.

>2. The hesychast’s “dark night of the soul” (Saint John of the Cross – for instance)

Christian mysticism does have some shamanistic elements, as with certain aspects of the character of Jesus. If one were to be left alone to find one's own way out of the "dark night of the soul", without any formal religious doctrine to direct one towards a pre-existing conclusion, I would equate that roughly with shamanism. Religious doctrines and dogmas, however, remove a fundamental dimension of shamanistic experience, which is that the initiate must find his or her way alone. One doesn't discover the true nature of life – that it is a thin membrane of consciousness stretched over an abyss – if one constructs a doctrine of salvation. Shamanism is, rather, a religion of the damned – more precisely, it is a religion FOR the damned. It is the eschewal of easy doctrines of hope and salvation, since by sacrificing hope one obtains one's shamanistic death – and rebirth.

>3. Traditional Buddhism’s (non-dualistic meditations of death and impermanence)

Yes, I think shamanism is very close to some aspects of Buddhism, especially those you mention. Of course, once again, it is not the same as Buddhism to the degree that Buddhism becomes doctrinaire or offers a way to salvation, for instance through reincarnation or moral perfection.

>4. The angst and ecstasy of Fela Kuti’s music

From the very little I read, I would say there could be a strong link. Music itself is very much linked to shamanism. The beat of the drum is supposed to regulate the shaman's soul journey.

>5. The authenticity of Che Gevara’s life?

I don't want to make too much of this link, because Guevara has been so obviously coopted by Western culture as representative of a kind of pop psychology revolutionary ideal. Also, the tendency to elevate one person above another as a prime example of a particular condition goes against the grain of shamanism, which is an equal-opportunity pathway. To put it another way, it is everybody's birthright to return to the womb and to be reborn. The results of such shamanic initiation will vary widely. For some, perhaps it will make of them revolutionaries. Others will becomes something entirely different. Death and rebirth leads to a certain fearlessness and contempt for conformity – but there are different levels of this experience and different outcomes from tapping into the deeper parts of one's psyche. The process of death and rebirth taps into pre-existing innate propensities. If those propensities are healthy, one can become a much better person. It is not beyond reason to think that some people might become worse as a result of initiation – they might tap into previously hidden qualities of hatred or resentment. In general, I think the process of death and rebirth makes one more aware of what one is – and therefore enhances authenticity.

>As far as “Body self-awareness” and “corporate-existence awareness” – both the inter-layering of existential/psychological and social/political seem to exist in all of these above mentioned experiences once high levels of integration are achieved.

Yes, in general, although doctrinaire elements can interfere with this.

>The apparent contradiction in the personalities and views of characters in Marechera’s writings – I agree that this is not likely a post-modern inclusivism? Could it also be explained by an Asian view of existence that accepts two apparently conflicting views as “truth” (both – and) rather than the classical occidental view of (either – or)? Could all existence be a form of layered consciousness that is continually emerging and once confined by words, can never really be captured in its fullness? Thus Marechera’s apparent contradictory affects; is it possible that he is not pointing to political “rights” and “wrongs” as much as an “emergence” of what best serves us as a global community? A “praxis”, wherein we begin with a conscious path, find sticking points, evaluate the consequential effects, and navigate again with our new learning (A Hegelian dialectic, if you will).

I'm not quite sure where you are going with this, but I do think that ideological filters of consciousness make us see personalities and behaviour as more consistent than they are. It is to Marechera's credit that he saw more of the inconsistencies. I have noticed, for instance, that Western psychology, in particular, deems that we are all "identities" with particular categorical definitions. Consequently, if I act outside of the expectations regarding my particular identity, many people in Western society are quick to offer ad hoc explanations as to why my behaviour, whilst seeming not to conform to the definition I am supposed to be, nonetheless approximates a certain kind of conformity. To be able to understand that identity is merely a subjective, ideological construct is perhaps the quintessential shamanistic insight. The ad hoc explanations are supposed to save us from stress, by making the world seem more logical and predictable than it is. Therefore, one must face one's own fears and a lot of stress, to realise that reality has a form that goes beyond our expectations of it. In an existential sense, this is really the substance of shamanistic death and rebirth.

>What is it like for you to experience your own shamanism via program of “scholastic-speak”? Do you experience any colonization because of the paradigm you have chosen t express your experience?

Scholastic speak doesn't lend itself very well to communicating the shamanistic experience, but then very little of ordinary communication is capable of communicating such a thing. Georges Bataille makes much of the fact that non-ordinary forms of communication are required.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

reflection

2011-06-13T18:52:00.001-07:00

Sometimes it can be very useful indeed to refresh one's memory as to how misogyny tends to function. Otherwise, one can doubt one's original perceptions.

Yesterday, I engaged with two misogynists who had no idea they were misogynists. One of the cases was more complicated than the other. The simpler case proved to be most instructive, because it clarified for me that much misogyny originates with the type of male eros that 'needs' an external source of emotion in order to feel gratified. This is why the formula that women are emotional and men are rational is so hard to move. Empirical evidence points otherwise in all sorts of ways, but nonetheless a certain kind of male's drive to feel that his intelligence ought to be reflected in an emotional pool, deemed to be "woman", is very strong and thoroughly blinding.

Jennifer Armstrong

2011-06-09T19:24:00.001-07:00

Clearing the slate.

2011-05-06T22:34:00.001-07:00

Karen Winnett: people perceive a whole lot of ":rules" all quite imaginary and arbitrary..but they live these self imposed rules believing them to be real....in some fashion.they are normally... inherited, packages cobbled together from apretnal and peer ipout,negative social encounters and school reinforcements.People draw these conclusions and then assume theya re immutable.And they make the mistake of assuming others have the same template.Its all actually quite atomized and individual..stemming for a much smaller level of cultural imprint that we really.We are not as homogeneous as we think.

Jennifer Armstrong: That is why when some initiate into shamanism "faces death", they realise that all of these very peculiar and personal blueprints do not matter one bit. They mean nothing in the face of death, since they cannot preserve you at all. So you let go of those and your perspectives broaden.

2011-04-26T09:15:00.000-07:00

emboss

2011-04-25T17:31:00.000-07:00

Visiting the extremes

2011-04-24T17:38:00.000-07:00

My sex drive is extemely high, as are all of my hormonal levels. Nothing in my life is particularly smooth, as a result of these bombastic hormones. On what may be presumed to be the positive side of things, I don't find sexual engagement to be a problem. Even if I'm not feeling like it at a particular moment, I can adjust very quickly to the mood. It's very natural. When I am feeling on top of things in my life, my libido increases even more. Even at lower levels of interest, I have never been unsatisfied with sexual coupling. On the negative side of having such extreme hormones, my menstrual events have to be regulated by oral hormones, or it is like death. I do not exaggerate when I say it is like having swallowed poison whilst having a knife in the lower belly that I cannot remove. Psychologically speaking, I feel like I have a grenade in my stomach, which can and will explode. As a result of my biological state, I take a lot of interest in how people experience violence as well as various emotional extremes (i.e relating to the endurance of extreme pain).

Jennifer Armstrong: Self defence teaching

2010-10-30T23:44:00.000-07:00

Go to YouTube.

In Zimbabwe

2010-10-21T23:30:00.000-07:00

BREAK FREE

2010-10-17T04:37:00.001-07:00

Destitution: Hillsong Christian singing in Zimbabwe

2010-09-17T21:15:00.000-07:00

The patriarchal witchdoctor

2010-09-17T15:07:00.000-07:00

In regard to a sexy woman, "asking for it" reinforces the idea that:

For women, sex is trouble.

Men have so little control over their actions that a woman's appearance can provoke them into harassment or worse.

Women have men in mind when they choose what to wear or how to behave.

If a woman dresses or acts in a sexy way in hopes of having sex, then she's fair game for all men.

Women should not or will not clearly initiate or consent to sex. Men have to look for clues, such as the way a woman dresses, to see if she wants it.

Sex is akin to a bar fight in which women provoke men, and the men react in a way that proves their manhood while putting women in their place.

http://www.echidneofthesnakes.blogspot.com/

This is very intriguing stuff by Suzie, and it is spot on in terms of how patriarchy reasons. The patriarchy insists that women should be thoroughly passive, and that it must somehow play witchdoctor, inspecting the entrails of female behaviour, in order to discover their mysterious meanings.

This insistence on women's passivity by the patriarchy is necessary in order for women to play the role they are required to, under the patriarchy. That is, they are to be mirrors of men's souls, nothing more and nothing less. So a male looking into a woman is supposed to be able to read his own sex drive, in terms of good or evil, and to make sense of it that way, in relation to other men.

If what he sees in the mirror makes him angry about himself, he may beat or kill the woman, but if what he sees of himself pleases him, he will try to couple with her in a more peaceful manner.

In any case, the patriarchal man is a narcissist who uses women as a means to an end.

On whipping

2010-09-16T17:00:00.001-07:00

People are often not consciously aware that they are being oppressive. That does not mean they are not guilty of oppression, only that they are not consciously aware of what they are doing. This leaves the person who is aware of it, indeed the person who is being oppressed, with a problem.

Suppose I am whipping you, only I am not aware that I am doing it.

The first point of action you might try is to ask me to stop.

Maybe you will get the response from me: "Well I'm comfortable acting like this. It is the quintessential me."

What will you then do?

You can try to grab the whip out of my hand, but I'm not going to let it go that easily. I say, "You are trespassing into my area and trying to take my private property!"

You can then try reasoning with me.

"Please give me that whip. We will both feel better if you are able to stop whipping me, and I will certainly respect you more."

I consider your request for a moment, and think, well, I don't really feel like I should stop whipping you to get your respect, when whipping you to get your respect is much more fun."

So you try to grab the whip from me using physical force.

Immediately, I let out a cry of alarm to all who are like me, who then appear on the scene with their whips, and start whipping you (writers of feminist blogs will understand this analogy.)

I says "See! Justice is on the side of the powerful. I hope you appreciate the efforts I've exerted in order to adjust your attitude -- for your own good. I don't want to have to make an example out of you again."

Having had this experience, you then come to a feminist blog like this one, and you say: "Perpetrators are as much victims and the actual victims are!"

Everybody then gives you three cheers.

why back to nature is not a good thing

2010-09-16T11:31:00.001-07:00

There is something about the spirit of the present age that is wrong, wrong, wrong. My suspicion is that there is too much indulgence of people's naturalness these days. Secularism has not been the redeeming factor one might have hoped it would be. A return to nature was never a good idea, because it has led to men treating women as if they were all a gargantuan nurturing body -- his "mummy". And women, I was told tonight, are just as often inclined to treat males like a daddy. Where this happens, "civilisation" is a misnomer, because really nobody is truly civilised. Rather, everybody just falls back into a familiar psychological and social pattern in their relationships with other people. "Civilisation", as such, does not (is not permitted to) intervene.

When this happens, we are all in a very low state, as I feel we are today.

One simply has to have something to compare it to, to know this, however.

When I went back to Zimbabwe, I felt I did not have to justify every little thing I said by trying to show that I had shaken it dry of all emotionalism (i.e. any personally discrediting content). At least in the white culture, there is not this form of social censure. People are just people, and their status does not have anything to do, in principle, with the degree to which they can demonstrate a separation between their mind and body. In black culture, where "civilisation" as externally imposed form has not intervened to such a degree (sorry if this sounds racist, but it is true), women are ascribed to be more emotional than men are deemed to be. That is, black culture is more genuinely "natural" in that it recognises men and women in terms of their relationships within the family.

It's not good -- not good at all, this global "return to nature". Really, something else has to intervene --some reason, some values imposed from on high, something creditable.

gender and civilisation

2010-09-16T00:00:00.000-07:00

I have trouble trying to see males, per se, as more rational than I. That doesn't work for me, and I can't seem to make this contemporary paradigm make any sense.

Confirmed somewhat from my recent trip to Zimbabwe, I get a sense that the culture there still views women as representing "civilisation" and men as representing the wild man, as part of "nature". If I am right that this really is how the majority of colonial whites see it, it also confirms that this is probably how I was brought up to see it, too.

If so, this would particularly account for my suspicion about gender roles in Western culture. After all, it would have been an effective switch, for me, to have start to see myself in terms of "nature" (at least at the subconscious level) whilst seeing males as representing the opposite symbolic pole of "civilisation" as such.

I needed to make that switch in my thinking in order to adapt successfully, to a very different culture, -- and I did not.

The more recent (or, in other terms, "urban") male strategy of dominance -- choosing to identify with civilisation rather than with nature -- seems linked to a movement from frontier cultures (wherein men were supposed to guard the peripheries) towards urban cultures. In this latter case, hierarchies, represented by the metaphor of the skyscraper, seem more apt. This is a case of men on top, women on the bottom.

***

..which would explain the nature of my project: a desperate effort to try to reinscribe myself into "nature" and into the realm of emotion, in order to adapt -- an effort that ultimately failed, since I have now chosen non-adaptation, not fitting in, as my only realistic recourse. And why I now see a large part of the memoir as representing a project that failed.

DADA

2010-09-13T00:35:00.000-07:00

How gender discrimination works

2010-09-12T21:46:00.000-07:00

There are structures in life that militate against us. These are distortions based on stereotyping, as well as limiting gender constructs that are based rather on a cookie-cutter model of humanity. These all concern feminine gender performance, which they oversee and serve to evaluate. These structures, it is important to point out, are not necessarily overtly sexist, but they are nonetheless sexist to the degree that they compel onlookers to judge women on how we appear and on our demeanour, (such trifling matters), rather than on what we say. And even when we are very clear about what we mean, what we say will still be distorted, in order to fit other people's stereotypes about what it is possible for us to mean within the existing ideological limits of gender stereotyping.

It is as there was an already existing silhouette of a woman sketched out on a piece of paper. Others then take on the role of monitoring you, to see how much of your energy takes you outside the lines of this pre-existing silhouette, and how much remains within those lines. To the degree that you do, say or think anything that takes you outside of these established boundaries, your career will be penalised, and your behaviour will be socially censured. Stay inside the lines, though, and you might just be okay, although you will not have much of a spark, and will be unlikely to say, do, or think anything that could be objectively considered very creative. You will certainly be living your life in close conformity with the existing structures of reality -- but you will be very boring!

000

A way to look British

2010-09-12T21:22:00.000-07:00

Jennifer F Armstrong

2010-09-02T00:08:00.000-07:00

Just women an' negroes, learnin' to speak

2010-08-24T23:51:00.000-07:00

If one delves deeply into patriarchal psychology -- a dangerous, and thankless task in all -- one finds that it is the role of patriarchy, and of patriarchal types, wherever they can be found, to teach women and Negroes how to speak properly.

A woman, as we ought to know, is unspeakable. As Eve led Adam to conclude, her very body parts will lead to the downfall of Man. This sense of things is the psychological factor that leads right wingers to always attack the way she is speaking. The point is to reduce her to shame, to let her to reflect upon the unspeakability of her body parts -- and to reflect (above all) on how these led to the downfall of Adam.

Blacks, as we also know (via Ian Smith and the Colonial Experience) fail to speak properly. Whether it is the devil in them, or just the lack of English in their original culture, the failure is palpable in the eyes of those whose English makes them rational enough to govern others.

Nowadays Negroes see themselves as better than women -- those whose unruly body parts appear to make them impossible to govern. Yet both Negroes and women remain unable to speak. That is because they still need to learn all the techniques that are entirely necessary for them to speak properly.

The status of women in Zimbabwe

2010-08-24T22:28:00.000-07:00

I went back to Zimbabwe recently, where a small group of people still living the colonial lifestyle still prevail. In Zimbabwe's black and white cultures, women are still referred to as "ladies", for the most part, and are expected to have concomitant characteristics, such as being too delicate to do a number of things and needing male protection. This system of gender does not work against individual women, although it generally works to keep them as a group in their place. For instance taxi drivers will often pick up women first, rather than a male client, especially if she is calling at night, because they believe that women need to be protected more than men do. On the other hand, "ladies" are supposed to do their part by dressing real, real nice, especially on Sundays, or for a trip to the shopping centre. They are also supposed to uphold the belief that women and men are essentially different kinds of beings.

Another thing is that Zimbabwean men generally have no idea about female biology -- and neither do many Zimbabwean women. I'm suspecting that the pill is now widely prescribed there, so many of the women deal with fairly bad menstrual cramping. This is explained, in polite company, as "having a headache". Men believe that women suddenly become shy, are unable to eat their food with much gusto, and so on, because that is part of women's psychological nature. They do not make a link to the actual biological cause of this behaviour. Furthermore, a lot of women also seem to be confused about this matter, believing that prolonged bleeding (for a month or more) can be caused by "witches" (those who are jealous of you and wish you harm) or by the womb becoming tipped over so that it can "no longer hold any blood."

I was teaching women's self defence there, at a rural primary school, and was asked also to address the issue of female hygiene -- although this certainly was not my area. The Shona man I was with said he didn't know anything about that topic, and he seemed, from what I could see, to be speaking quite literally.

Belief as it is related to Survival

2010-01-10T15:41:00.000-08:00

Having studied early childhood psychology for my thesis, it appears to me — especially considering things along the lines of Judith Lewis Herman’s views — that belief is related to survival. Thus a child who has an abusive parent at a very early age will grow up splitting their identity, with one part of their psyche knowing the parent is actually abusive, and the other part of the psyche having faith in a loving parent who is capable of bringing them up to full adulthood. Obviously this false belief is engendered by a survival mechanism, that is designed to protect the child from shock, for it would surely succumb to overwhelming psychological pressures and die if it did not dissociate from some of the reality.

So belief is linked to survival in human beings, and when there is a pathological influence during the developmental years, the child grows up with a tendency towards lying to themselves and others (ie. creating false beliefs), since he has learned to associate them with a sense of reassurance and, indeed, survival. That is the nature of a personality disorder that springs from early childhood experiences. The adult, who has survived these horrible circumstances of early childhood, does not seem to understand that they are lying. They feel that whatever they do or say is just “surviving”. Far from it being the case that the narcissist fears those that have power over him, the narcissists very source of lying comes about because he needs to have faith in those how have power over him. He learns to lie in order to protect an unsullied (but unrealistic) image of them that he holds in his head. Nonetheless, he has to maintain this image solely on the basis of “faith”, and so is in constant danger of losing his faith. When that happens, he will attack the image that he had held so dear, and proclaim that it was betraying him.

But the narcissist only gives us an extreme example of the general psychological connection between belief and survival. We are all inclined to believe whatever will spare us from shock — for we are shocked very easily when confronting our vulnerability. The disbelief in global warming, or in the vicious nature of The Patriarchy, and so on, is all very predictable, because these are actually shocking horrors. Paradoxically enough, our immediate survival (ie. not dying from shock) depends on our not believing in them. (Of course, our long term survival works on the exact opposite principle — requiring us to take these things very seriously, as if they were actually real!)

the nativisation of the triune brain

2010-01-06T17:28:00.001-08:00

The shamanistic (triune mind) paradigm is the nativistic paradigm of mind shared by most (especially black) Zimbabweans. It is why I find them very easy to relate to -- because we understand implicitly that we are relating to each other from a point of view of ego/emotion that can be relativised at any time, due to such things as religious sensibility or intellectual transcendence. I think that this implicit understanding that ego can always be relativised is why Zimbabweans joke with each other in a way that implies they do not take a lot of things seriously. Actually, they do. And, paradoxically, it is their sense of reverence for these other aspects of life (the mystical oneness derived from the lower parts of the brain; and the possibility of transcending reality through the intellect) that is involved in their relativisation of the ego.

By contrast, Westerners do not relativise the ego, therefore much of the joking that takes place between Zimbabweans would not make as much sense to an average person of a Western consciousness. For Westerners, however, there are no higher or lower realms of consciousness that are just as real as ego. Rather, for practical purposes, there is only one level of consciousness -- a Cartesian plane -- and so whatever is said had better be said with the maximum degree of seriousness and expectation of permanence. Also, emotion here is alienated, so that it becomes more dangerous and even something to be feared.

Also, on the theoretical level, the two level model, of Western Cartesian dualism, leads to a miscontruction of "primary processes" as being "emotional", when in fact they do not relate to emotionality as such but to a kind of apperception of power relationships. An understanding of power is the key point around which (at least, early) primary processes are oriented. Emotions are not developed at the very early level of primary process thinking (the paranoid-schizoid level of consciousness), but rather later, perhaps at the time of the development of the "depressive position". This is a significant point, since these early level processes cannot be "reached" via emotional expression or communication, but only via overt (such as ritualistic) displays of power. That is why, when dealing with problematic power relationships, emotional pleading or abstract reasoning will often miss their mark.

my conversion to atheism!

2009-12-31T05:40:00.000-08:00

Today, 12:27:58 PM– Flag – Like – Reply – Delete – Edit – Moderate Jennifer F Armstrong
One of the more embarrassing aspects of my childhood: I didn't want to be a princess, but I tried being a fairy, and I very much wanted to be an angel. The thing about being an angel is that you would become invulnerable and above all you would be able to fly. So, I made a card to God, and drew an angel on it, lest he be confused in any way about what I wanted to become. I wrote, "Dear God, please make me an angel before I wake up." I put this rather badly drawn card at the end of my bed, above my feet, and went to sleep, in faith mode, that since I had made the decision to "act on faith" and be an angel, everything I asked would come to pass. To facilitate this transition from human to angel, I practiced flapping my arms really really hard, whilst jumping. I believed that by virtue of such flapping I had managed to stay in the air about a quarter of a second longer than if I had not flapped. Such empirical evidence gave me hope that my aspiration to become an angel was not unfounded.

When I woke up the next day, however, I had not been transported. Even the card was there as if God hadn't even opened it and looked inside. I felt rather embarrassed that my gift, my petition, had been left unopened.

That was the morning of my first sneaking suspicion that God did not in fact exist.

But it all had to do with trying to adopt one of the options available for femininity -- in a way, a kind of death.

West Australian -- for the senate: Group Q

2007-11-13T00:57:00.000-08:00

Who is Dambudzo Marechera and what does he mean to me?

2007-08-21T18:48:00.000-07:00

Not too many people outside of Zimbabwe have heard the name of Dambuzo Marechera. While many have heard of Chinua Achebe, whose 1958 work, Things Fall Apart, was hailed as the definitive African novel. For Marechera, as well as for me and so many others of the generation whose parents fought the second Chimurenga or Rhodesian civil war, things fell apart, as well, in more ways than we could have told. We were the children of our parents – and therein laya problem. Neither Marechera nor I had any choice in the matter. Marechera was born in 1952, into a rural community in what is now Zimbabwe. When he was about to turn 16, I was born. His awareness of politics and the world around him would have been taking form in his teenage years, when the white colonial regime of Rhodesia declared its independence from Britain, thus crystalising the political structure of the society as a system which would probably be white-ruled for a long time to come. I was born three years after pronouncement of white independence. Five years before I was born, the country had seen the beginnings of a guerilla war – for there were those who wanted their independence from the whites, whereas the whites wanted their independence from Britain. So, I was born into a situation that had a backdrop of guerilla war and suppression of black ‘insurgency’. I was born on the white side of the fence, in glorious and expansive rural style suburbia. Marechera was born into rural huts and ultimately into the black ghetto of Vengere Township. Given these obvious differences, what can we have in common?

The question might well be asked, and the most honest answer is that we were both children of our parents. Black and white we may be, but neither of us decided to afflict war on each other. That was a decision undertaken by those who represented our parents. Marechera and I were both in some sense born on the wrong side of the fence. The global community was for the black guerilla fighters and against the white oppressors, and yet, in actual fact, they were taking sides with one or other of our parents. We – the children of our parents – were never asked about our views. We were never given a choice. So, it was that Marechera, child of his parents, grew up struggling against the tide. Offered an education in English, he was keen to follow through in order to get out of his ghettoised environment. Meanwhile, his parents raged against him learning English, causing him to burn his school books in anguished confusion or protest. I, on the other hand, the child of my parents, was caused to emigrate a few years after the guerilla war had ended with the country falling into the hands of a black majority. Being the child of my parents, the war didn’t end there for me. In fact, it was only just beginning. For little did I realise that sacrifices do not go unrequited. The Rhodesian war only began for me, upon migration to Australia, when I had come of age. I was 16 at the age of my Zimbabwean exit. It was the year 1984. We had barely found our feet in an altogether different culture, when it was already time for me to requite the parental sacrifice.

It began with condemnation that I was both socially lost on one hand, and that I was adapting to what must have been presumed to be the nefarious and decadent values of the first world, on the other. Poor adaptation and the cultural values that I had adopted through partial assimilation meant that all my parents’ sacrifices to maintain an ideological purity had been entirely in vain. I was not growing up with the values that they had battled for against Dambudzo’s parents. So, I was worse than a traitor, from my parents’ point of view. I was somebody who was undoing history – and undoing them, in the process. Each difficult step I made towards adaptation to the new and foreign culture earned its punishment. To break me down and make me repent was my parents’ goal – the unspoken agenda they had against my growing up in ways which hadn’t been prescribed.

This brings me to why I relate so much to Marechera. Reading his works, I am made aware of how the simplicities of our parents – and indeed of the global community, in supporting one faction of our parents against another parental faction – have led to intellectually impoverished perspectives. Marechera and I have both revolted against moral, social and political oversimplifications, in favour of a level of understanding that takes into account the human elements of suffering, and what it means to be historically (and socially) contingent beings – the children of our parents. Reading Marechera’s works, I encounter the complexities of emotional life, in forms which do not compromise the meanings of experiences, in order to please the powers that be. Marechera writes in a complex manner and this complexity is his integrity, for as he says:

The tyranny of straightforward things is more oppressive and more degrading than such idle monstrosities as life and death, apartheid and beer drinking, a stamp album and Jew-baiting. One plus one equals two is so irrefutably straightforward that the unborn child can see that even if man was wiped off the face of the earth one plus one would always and forever-equal two. [92]

Uebermensch and The Survivor Personality

2007-05-27T00:16:00.000-07:00

Uebermensch and The Survivor Personality

maybe -- but of course there are many people who also have chemical imbalances.

Furthermore, the writer of this piece doesn't seem to understand Nietzschean irony.

Do Not Enter The Tea Room

2007-05-08T18:11:00.001-07:00

Do Not Enter The Tea Room

mike

2007-04-24T02:44:00.000-07:00

you are my brain, therefore we need a lobotomy!

2007-04-20T22:24:00.000-07:00

Actually, and I might have said this before, but mine thought that I was part of his brain. Not the good part, mind you. He was all of the good part. He thought I was the part of his identity which he didn't like about himself. Because he thought I was an unruly part of his own brain, he had to keep control over me at all times. This was harder for him to do when I was quiet, minding my own business, keeping to myself -- so, he had to provoke me, outrage me, get me to speak out, so that he could then manage to somehow dominate me and gain a sense of control again, over his "own brain". I tell you, only feminists would believe this. This kind of insanity is barely distinguishable from normal, everyday sexism in most of the world's eyes. In any case, I raised the issue of his behaviour with a number of people and nobody did anything -- except later it turned out that I was being blamed in some ways. It seemed that my father's illusion that I was an unruly part of his brain had been conveyed to my extended family as being somehow a portrayal of reality.

parody of the misogynist ideology of hate

2007-04-07T16:31:00.000-07:00

The real reason men are angry at women (misogynistic) is that they just haven’t met the woman who is capable of being a true woman yet. In fact, that true woman is Lorena Bobbitt. The answer to the question, “What do men really want?” is clear to women. However, men repress this answer as they are too weak to face it (just as most women –except for a very few — are too weak to give them what they secretly crave). Men secretly want castration. It is only because most women balk at this reality that men are largely the misogynists they are to day. They are angry at women because women will not be Lorena Bobbitt — which is what they secretly desire. They will continue to be angry, and behave like dogs until we give them what they really want but won’t admit to wanting (because they are too weak for this kind of honesty). It is the true woman who bears the knife which puts an end to all male longing. When women become real women, then men will experience the bliss they really crave (but which is not available to them in their present state.)

Amazon.com: The No Asshole Rule: Building a Civilized Workplace and Surviving One That Isn't: Books: Robert I. Sutton

2007-02-25T00:45:00.000-08:00

Amazon.com: The No Asshole Rule: Building a Civilized Workplace and Surviving One That Isn't: Books: Robert I. Sutton

seeing too much.

2007-01-31T17:43:00.000-08:00

I am walking along, and I am
thinking, "How to envisage myself smaller? How to see the little, tapestry-fine
needlework, when my eyes are already too ....big and blurry. Something is surely
going on: Shadowy shapes form themselves at the periphery of my vision. They
draw to them: downwards! Top the side! And upwards, too! –––––––– but by the
moment I am looking at them, I realise that a full on stare cannot hold them in
focus––––––––only the peripheral vision will. I am walking along and I am almost
thinking: there is something I am missing. I dare not think this thought, as I
am feeling numb. Numbness is a relief. I need to feel myself small and
nimble––––––––so I visualise something small and nimble, but my imagination is
sluggish, due to being holstered into something that it never wanted any part
in. Because of its resistance to the situation, my imagination has shut down. I
walk along––––––––and I am a robot. I am a cold robot––––––––for the wind is
gusty, but I’m dressed quite warm. I am a solemn robot –––––––– for I have a
mission to perform. I walk along–––––––– my body is a walking pole. I walk
along, after I am dead. By rights, I should not be walking here –––––––– it is
too stark. Birds are the only sign of life and nobody notices them. It is the
schoolyard, grey before dawn. I smile at people –––––––– the cleaners. But, they
seem like machines, to me, and I cannot imagine what motivates them. I smile
because they are the rules. Because nothing makes sense, I show ‘professional
courtesy’, because I am professional. Consciously I eliminate a frown; smoothed
out brow, and courtesy, intact. The crows know that I am. They are the only
truly living people, in cackling fits, in the sky -- here -- who know that I am
visiting a cemetery here, filled only with dead hopes and things that cannot be
expressed. Smiling, smiling, smiling, through the professional courtesies. If I
express non-machine like tendencies they are translated into a sequence of
whispering fits, which have consequences which never end. Like a zit under a
magnifying glass, the private moment of distress becomes a public catastrophe,
in no time. The public good has to be taken care of, always, so that nothing
must go unreported. Every bit of information caught is ‘shared’. And so: I feel
myself being sucked up into half formed feelings and ideas of cannibalism. I am
chewing on my own flesh and the poisons are coming out of my fat. I am chewing
my own muscle fibre and I feel bad. There is a warm, sick feeling of my own
being as a child, whirring -- plaintively -- around my head like a spotted,
psychedelic, sick, phantasm. It fills the sky, and blocks out everything, except
the crows. I feel like I am now devouring it. I am eating my life bit by bit,
minced, raw, and without form. A sickening ooze of warm blood develops around my
mouth –––––––– and encrusts there. I feel I am bobbing around on an ocean, and
I’m short of nourishment, but I have a life raft. For the first time I am
grateful to ‘professional courtesy’ for not noticing, or registering my
distress. Consequently, I am overly grateful and loquacious in extolling the
many and wondrous virtues of ‘professionalism’. "It is a great thing!" I say.
"And, a truly magnificent thing!" I extol the virtues of my "would-be rescuers"
who condescend to me because I cannot kill them, just because I do not have the
nerve, nor energy, to obliterate them.

and ever, amen!

2007-01-23T00:16:00.000-08:00

"Dialogue" with my father who drops in, impromptu:

[after a very long interaction with Mike about sports..}

"So, Jen, what are you up to these days? Did you ever get going with that course you were going to do?"

Me: Yes. I've made a lot of progress with it, actually.

"Oh. The last time I heard you were waiting for something to start."

Me: Yes, it's like that in academia. Always waiting for something...

"I know all about that! My work blah blah blah blah blah."

Me: gets up and walks off to the kitchen. Looks for something to eat. Comes back, at a leisurely pace and sits down again after 5 minutes.

"So, what was the course you were doing anyway?"

Me: Have a guess!

"It was, er...Masters or something wasn't it?"

Me: No. Try again.

"...er..."

Me: You get two more guesses. If you fail both, you're out!"

Mike: I'll give you a clue: It's a doctorate.

"Oh, a doctorate! What is it in?"

Me: English and communication studies.

"Ah I see."

Me: Yes, I didn't expect you to already have this information, due to my small female brain!"

"[softening tone as if to acknowledge the implicit truth of a self-deprecating statement]... Yes, well. [As if to imply, "but what can anybody really do?"] So!..... MIKE.....!."

2006-01-15T20:48:00.000-08:00

What were scientists and educators thinking when they allowed the teachings of evolution (not so much a theory anymore) to be reduced to the idea that man evolved from apes?

I don't know -- but it has produced a society of apes. Seriously, I am unimpressed with much of western society and what it has degenerated into. Whenever I have cause to speak with someone bored and bred in the west, I generally draw a great intake of breath, quite prepared for some casual dominance and submission idiocy.

You know what though? I'm not an ape. And I'm also way too clever for your operant conditioning techniques, which are supposed to turn me into a busy and productive little worker.

Life with Neptune

2006-01-12T04:08:00.000-08:00

I always enjoyed the impunity of the right wing refrain, “If you don’t like it here, go back to where you came from.” So resolute, so transcendent of any and all material realities it appeared.

And yet, and yet, it still (apparently) needs translation. “If you don’t like it here…… go back where? live where?….” not all parts of the earth are fit for decent human habitation — and that is partly because the world is a GLOBAL community, where what happens politically in Australia can affect events as far away as …I dunno… Africa?

So, in effect, the glorious right wing refrain echos the views entailed in Howard’s Pacific Solution. Namely, “If you don’t like it here, go and live AT THE BOTTOM OF THE OCEAN WITH NEPTUNE.”

I’m facetious of course — But ask yourself, why was “children overboard” such a credible scenario?

It echoed the right wing refrain that there are two choices, to live here or at the bottom the ocean -- like this was a god's honest truth about our options!