From: cortese@skid.ps.uci.edu (Janis Maria Cortese)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Mythopoetic ritual (a possibly Very Weird topic)
Date: 9 Jan 1993 01:14:27 GMT
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: remarque.berkeley.edu
Originator: muffy@remarque.berkeley.edu

[Moderator's note: this is drifting from feminism.  Please try to make
followups relevant, or redirect them to the newsgroup of your choice. - MB]

In article <C0JytG.AHH.1@cs.cmu.edu> tp0x+@cs.cmu.edu (Thomas Price) writes:
>I apologize, but I'll have to quote an awful lot for context.

Same here. 

>(Here's where I came in)
>>>It is quite in keeping with the exclusive nature of the initiation
>>>rituals of primitive peoples, both for males and females. Do you have
>>>a well thought out opinion that they are childish too? Or do you just
>>>not know what you're talking about?
>
>(Janis Cortese writes in response:)
>
>>Are you honestly saying that we are equal in every respect to a
>>culture -- "primitive" or "nontechnological" depending on how
>>ethnocentric you want to seem -- that sees no constant barrage of
>>violence every time they turn on the TV, that has no access to violent
>>pornography, that doesn't talk about "sexual surrender," that has a
>>frequently polytheistic religion with role-model divinities for each
>>sex?  Come ON -- there is a huge difference between early agrarians
>>and food foragers and what we are now, and I can't buy your attempt to
>>equalize us so facilely.
>
>No, of course I'm not saying that we are equal in every respect -- and
>I do not think that my earlier statement entails such a belief.

It seemed like you were saying, "What good for them is good for us, so
nyaah."  I think perhaps you said what you wanted to say too shortly,
and I would have liked a little more elaboration. 

>I understand you to be saying that sex-exclusive rituals are categorically
>bad in contemporary American culture -- or, at least, female-exclusive
>ones are. I would not feel comfortable making such a sweeping statement.

I'm saying that they can be perverted very easily, and this must be
watched out for.  The tendency for exclusivity and falling into a
"Cherchez la femme" mentality is almost impossible to get away from, and
I think men must be vigilant against this -- really VIGILANT, as women
must be vigilant against the cultural wells we fall into. 

>Clearly, there is a great difference between ourselves and the peoples with
>whom Robert Bly has worked. However, he believes with Carl Jung that certain 
>psychological archetypes are universal. I see no reason not to believe this.

Certainly certain ones are.  How is this PRACTICALLY APPLIED?  Are you
saying that because the rituals are all rites of passage that they
reflect the same archetype?  This is too broad a statement to be used to
justify anything, I think.  It is true.  2+2=4 in all cultures, but that
doesn't mean all peoples would view quantum mechanics the same way. 

I just think that this statement is too loose and broad to be used to
validate anything specific.  

>While cultural effects will vary widely, effects of ritual on individuals
>seem to be surprisingly similar across cultures.

This is too sweeping a statement.  Prove this.  I'm serious.  I'm saying
just the opposite -- that they can be and in many instances are quite
different.  Make sure that you use a widely enough varying pool of
cultures and that they aren't interacting before you make statements.
This is called "Somebody's Problem" in anthropology.  I can't for the
life of me remember who.  

>Whether bringing those effects to pass among individuals in this particular
>culture is worth doing is a topic which has not yet been addressed here. 
>I'd be interested in hearing substantive comments.

Depends on what effects they are . . .

>>What is good for one culture is not good for another.  One of the most
>>basic tenets of ANY social science is that the beliefs and activities
>>of a culture must be examined within that culture's framework to see
>>how it holds up with whatever else they do.  You CANNOT logically
>>attempt to prove the merits of an activity in modern American culture
>>by appealing to the tenets of another nontech culture.  They are
>>valuable role models that expand our ideas of the possible in human
>>behavior, and we may take from other cultures and attempt to integrate
>>their values into our system, but to evaluate our activities according
>>to their values is like attempting to prove a theorem in hyperbolic
>>geometry using the postulates of Euclidean -- senseless.
>
>You are concerned with the cultural effects; I cannot argue with any
>of your statements. Again, I am inclined to believe that the effects 
>of the initiation rituals on the individuals who participate are
>surprisingly similar across cultures. 

Even in the face of the incredible differences present across most
nontechie cultures and ours?  You are in effect basing your statements
on "I just believe this to be true" whereas I think you are in error. 

>>People that have initiation rituals in nontechie cultures have any of
>>a variety of other things -- sexual equality, genital mutilation from
>>infibulation to subincision, freedom of sexual choice, complete
>>rigidity in sexual choice, homosexuality phobias to encouragements,
>>mass media to none of this . . . the list goes on.  Are you honestly
>>saying that the initiation rituals in ALL of these cultures function
>>identically and have identical value to the people in each culture?
>
>I'm afraid that I don't understand how such a statement would follow
>from my comments.

YOu just said it above!  " . . . the effects of the initiation rituals
on the individuals who participate are surprisingly similar across
cultures."  I maintain that they are not, and that you must take care
not to simply look at the way they affect patriarchal pastoral nomads in
Asia, Anatolia, Africa, and North America.  We're talking abot more than
geographical distance here. 

>I'd be willing to listen to a detailed summary of why rituals such
>as the one originally described are categorically, incorrigably bad for 
>contemporary American society. I'd much prefer such a summary to sniping 
>about what is "typical" of Robert Bly, who apparently nobody actually reads.

I'm saying that men here have a tremendous amount of culturally-specific
baggae to deal with regarding women -- just as women do for men, and
that special care must be taken to be aware of that.  I am nowhere
saying that these things are whole-hog *B*A*D* for anyone, and I suspect
that you are leaping to conclusions that because I take exception to
your cultural generalizing that I must hate men's rituals.  I do not.

And I have read Robert Bly.  And, yes, I don't like him.  Talk about
"Cherchez la femme!"  But I do know many other men who are actively
involved in men's groups and rituals, and I applaud their attempt to
redefine themselves, to be able to find out what manhood is aside from
the old Iron Man garbage -- the man who shows no pain when he is kicked
and is afraid to admit how much he needs others.  The man who functions
well only in harness.  The man who finds himself by putting his friends
and his women down.  The man who distances himself from his kids because
he feels like a "fag" when he does it.  The little boy who get taunted
cruelly for "throwing like a girl."

I know and love many men.  I have seen the aftereffects of this shaming
and humiliation and the inadequecy they feel in themselves as a result.
I have seen men I love and respect torn up from never quite feeling like
they made the team.  I applaud men who redefine themselves, men who
learn how to relax.  If women are to redefine themselves, this cannot
take place without a concomitant effort from men.

But Robert Bly?  Don't like him.  Read hin, and don't like him.  I've
heard something about him that also disturbs me greatly (the reference
is in Ms.  I have to go through my back copies to find it).  In a
meeting where he was talking, one man asked him if they were going to
get in touch with "their feminine sides."  (This whole issue of whether
or not people have "sides" to them is another fave-rave rant topic for
me, but I'll restrain myself since it's not relevant here.)  Bly's
response was, "If you're a momma's boy,. get the fuck out of the
temple."  He talks about looking around himself in dismay and seeing
"soft" men.  This shaming trick is the oldest trick in the book for men
to painfully browbeat each other into doing things, the same as that
cruel and hurtful playground taunt, "You throw like a girl!"  This
mutates into, "What are you, a faggot?" when the kid reaches adulthood.

THIS is why I dislike Robert Bly, but not a men's movement in general.
As Starhawk said, I wish with all my heart that men could be wild
without being, well, assholes.  

>>There exists also (I think it's in a Margaret Mead book) an account of
>>an initiation ritual for young boys by which they are required to
>>drink what they call "fathers' milk" -- they are required to perform
>>fellatio on all older men of the tribe because by doing this, they
>>believe that they ingest a mystical substance that will nourish their
>>budding manhood.  
>
>I believe you are in error, and are referring to the practice of feeding
>the young men on blood drawn from the older men's bodies, frequently
>>from the subincision wounds in their penises -- blood, not semen.
>Collected in bowls, not mouths.

I believe I quoted from the wrong source, as I e-mailed you about.  This
book is called either _Manhood in the Making_ or _The Making of
Manhood_.  If you check a computer card catalogue under both titles, you
should find it. 

>>I'm sorry -- you can't just adopt this K-Mart attitude towards other
>>cultures' practices.  

[deleted]

>I want to start from my ignorance, not my anger.

About the ignorance not anger bit, I'm sorry.  Most women do not have
that luxury, of not having anger.  We use our anger as a motivator, not
as a means of causing us to misinterpret data.

Regards,
Janis C.


-- 
Post articles to soc.feminism, or send email to feminism@ncar.ucar.edu.
Questions and comments should be sent to feminism-request@ncar.ucar.edu.  This
newsgroup is moderated by several people, so please use the mail aliases. Your
article should be posted within several days.  Rejections notified by email.