Tag Archives: relationship

Chuck’s Place: Locker Room Talk

(This is the third in a series of blogs around the same theme. Beginning with Narcissism on the Way to Love and followed by Hillary as Hermaphrodite, this blog takes a closer and deeper look at the psychology of narcissism. All three blogs are commentaries on the rebalancing of the masculine and feminine partnership, so necessary for the survival of the world and currently being played out in the political arena.)

Recent political events have given rise to the term “locker room talk” as a recognizable and understandable categorization of male sexual fantasy or actual sexual behavior, at least one common expression of it. So recognizable is its occurrence that many intelligent women in a recent New York Times article actually dismissed locker room talk as a legitimate reason to disqualify a potential presidential candidate exposed as engaging in it, in locker room talk.

On some level these women seem to be expressing the truth and acceptance that all men have that side of themselves; however annoying or immature it might be—it simply is. So, what is “it”?

In my recent blog, Narcissism on the Way to Love, I gave a nod to Freud’s stages of libidinal (sexual) development, beginning in primary narcissism. Narcissism is a psychological mindset that literally can’t get its face beyond looking in the mirror. The eyes simply cannot take in a picture of the world separate from the self.

Time to put away the toys and grow up! - Photo by Jan Ketchel
Time to put away the toys and grow up!
– Photo by Jan Ketchel

Relationship is not possible at the narcissistic stage because relationship requires two separate people in order to exist. For the narcissist there is only one being, the self. Of course, at the adult stage, a narcissist must function in a world of separate objects, and they do. However, those objects are just that, toys in a toy chest for one’s pleasure and amusement.

Locker room talk depicts a woman, not as a separate being, but rather as an object with body parts available for one’s play and for one’s taking: legs, tits, asses, and pussies. The narcissist cannot solve the puzzle of a world beyond the self, much less the mystery of woman, a being distinctly other than themself. In fact, the terror of confronting the mystery of otherness gives rise to the sanctuary of locker room talk. Here men can brag of tales of conquest as they graphically describe the booty of body parts, the treasures they have stolen or intend to steal. Here men collude in an attempt to avoid real terror at the power of nature as embodied in a woman. The fixation here does indeed go back to mother. For what more powerful being on earth could there be than woman, whose body gives life to all human beings?

Freud localized this problem to an incestuous desire to unite with this powerful woman and therefore remain under her protectorate in an eternal Eden of bliss. Jung expanded this perspective beyond this regressive wish to include the challenge to individuate, to truly become a separate self capable of standing on one’s own two feet and thereby actually able to take on the mystery of relating to a feminine being that exists outside the narcissistic orbit of the first three chakras. For Jung, true relationship could only begin at the level of the heart chakra, where another individual can be seen and experienced objectively as existing outside of the self.

At the heart center, another person is a whole person, both body and psyche. Connection requires meeting the whole person. Body parts may indeed activate instinctual desires, but at the heart center the true desire is to meet and connect with another being, body and soul. Reaching this stage of development requires a heroic effort to both withstand the regressive protectorate of the mother world, frequently projected onto all women “partners,” and a willingness to truly encounter the mystery, power, and integrity of another as they truly are.

Donald Trump serves as a helpful example of both Freud and Jung’s perspectives. Donald expresses his penchant for married woman. Freud, of course, would see the oedipal victory in this: steal another man’s wife, obtain mother! This includes the power dynamic of defeating father because, as Donald states, in his world mother (married woman) willingly chooses/loves his lecherous approaches!

Jung would acknowledge this pyrrhic regressive victory but would insist as well that the hero in this case has really not slain the primordial dragon of dependency on mommy and her power to sustain life. To slay the dragon is to move beyond the family nursery, to stand on one’s own and enter the mystery of life. And, in entering that mystery of life, we must grant others their own autonomous existence.

Beyond the narcissistic orbit others are not simply need-fulfilling objects to play with or break. Others are powerful beings who likely terrify us because of their godly ability to give life, as well as take it if they see fit. Can woman be granted the fullness of who she truly is? This is a Relationship 101 prerequisite.

Like the toys of childhood, locker room talk must be put away if we are to take on the challenge of true adulthood and real relationship. It’s time to stop settling for less, men and women alike.

Outside the locker room,

Chuck

Chuck’s Place: Programmed For Love

We arrive in this world fully programed to receive the love, attention, and nurturance that will support the unfolding and maturation of our human selves. We are preprogrammed to bond with our primary caretakers, the parents entrusted and programmed to respond with loving nurturance to our deepest needs for safety, food, and emotional affirmations.

Those archetypes... about as solid as stone... - Photo by Jan Ketchel
Those archetypes… about as solid as stone…
– Photo by Jan Ketchel

These preexistent programs are what Jung called archetypes, nature’s tried and true wisdom encoded in instinctual patterns to ensure the survival and thriving of a human life. Despite the robustness of nature’s guiding archetypal programs, something has to happen to turn them on. With infants, a simply smile is often sufficient enough to trigger deep emotional bonding with adults. Humans, however, are fallible. We left the archetypal Garden long ago and often find ourselves deeply estranged from reading the environmental clues that activate nature’s bonding program. Winnicott, the English psychiatrist/pediatrician, softened the blow of this reality by stating that parents only had to be “good enough” for these innate growth programs to be activated in children.

The important detail to be gleaned from this powerful interaction between parents and children is its impersonal nature. Innate programs are not personal, they are the same for our entire species. We are all born with them. When caretakers respond to our archetypal programs we attach and love them. This has nothing to do with who personally our parents are, it has to do with how well our programs line up with each other.

When they align we experience deep love, but again, that love is impersonal. It’s the running of nature’s program and the powerful energetic and emotional response we have to it. Again, this powerful emotional response is not because of who the parent is, but only because of their ability to engage in an archetypal drama being activated between child and parent, a drama in which they both have starring roles.

The same kind of impersonal archetypal “love” ignites in adult romantic relationships. Nowadays, with the advent of instant connection between romantically inclined adults through internet dating sites, we can observe the rapid activation of innate mating programs running full cycle over the course of just one day.

Saying the right words, paying attention at the right moment can activate the most powerful feelings of ultimate soulmate through cyberspace. A hit on a dating site in the morning could result in a phone call at noon, a shared evening dinner, and a night of ecstasy. Of course, by the next morning, the personal reality of who this other being is begins to appear under the brightening light of the rising sun. One begins to face the power of having been swept away by an instinctual archetypal pattern to merge and mate. The being before us is truly a personal mystery, the depth of our emotional and ecstatic experience the result of having performed in an archetypal drama, of having participated in a deep mystery of nature, summoned from the hidden depths of our being.

However, if we are completely honest with ourselves, there is nothing personal in the relationship. In fact, we’d be hard pressed to call it a relationship at all if we define relationship as being truly consciously related to another. To be truly connected to another we must truly know them as people beyond the archetypal projections that ruled the night. However instinctually satisfying the encounter may have been, we can hardly call it a real relationship.

Conscious relationships require time and true knowing and acceptance of another as they truly are. Though our archetypal blueprint predisposes and pressures us to partake in powerful dramas to truly feel alive, needed, and loved, the paradox remains: deep, instinctual bonding and love is not in the least bit personal love.

It is our human challenge to reconcile instinctual and personal love. Our evolutionary trajectory is pressuring us to find instinctual satisfaction in a consciously related personal relationship.

All too frequently, that which draws us instinctively is completely opposite to what we feel consciously companionable to. That is our current cross to bear as a species. At present, we are a civilization struggling with the old archetypal patterns of blind tribalism and loyalty of blood and action vs a consciously related world that puts the true needs of the world over the self interest of the archetypally bound tribe.

In our most basic relationships, where impersonal love and obligation bind us, we must ask ourselves whether the actual relationships we are in, even with our most intimates, are in fact personal relationships at all. Sometimes primal relationships must end. They may have served their primal need, nature’s imperative, but they may never have taken root in a personal way, which is the only way we can grow and fulfill our modern evolutionary imperative: the reconciliation of nature and consciousness, animal and spirit, the full truth of who we are.

We are programmed for love, but are we truly able to advance that program with consciousness?

Personally,

Chuck

 

Chuck’s Place: Unconditional Love

The highest form of love is love without condition, the total embracing acceptance of all that we are.

This is the welcome that we all seek as our birthright into life in this world, loving acceptance of all that we are, simply because we are. This is the love the child longs to see mirrored in its parent’s eyes to help fortify a deep sense of worthiness, confidence, and lovability that encourages the journey to individuation, to becoming all that we truly are in this life. This is the love we seek in partnership, a loving embrace of all of our body self, all of our virtues as well as all of our sins.

Shadow partners... - Photo by Chuck Ketchel
Shadow partners…
– Photo by Chuck Ketchel

In our time, the longing for unconditional love has come to be felt as an inalienable right, an entitlement. If one does not experience unconditional love immediately one feels empowered and righteous to end a relationship or marriage rather quickly. However, relationships are cauldrons where confronting the unacceptable, in both self and other, is part of the process of growing. If one exits a relationship due to unmet acceptance too prematurely the opportunity to experience the coveted “unconditional love” may be missed.

The first challenge in achieving unconditional love is to unconditionally love the self. The process of socialization we all encounter growing up leaves us with a huge shadow self, a rejected part of the self that we are taught must be forsaken due to its unacceptability.

Do we know that shadow self? Do we hate it as it has been hated? Do we expect a partner to remedy our disdain for a part of ourselves that even we do not love, expecting another to lovingly accept all of us?

Can we actually turn over that unwanted shadow self to another to make it wanted? We can try, but we’ll never fully believe the outcome. Even if a partner claims love for that which we hate in ourselves, it will not be redeemed. We will either need constant reassurance to silence our inner doubt or we simply won’t believe our “naive” partner. We will retain the “true knowledge” of our unacceptability.

In other ways, it might just be that parts of ourselves deemed unlovable might indeed be immature, with a limited capacity for relationship. Young children are far more concerned with themselves—primary narcissism, it’s called—than the needs of others. This may be quite appropriate at an infantile stage of development, but it is hardly adaptive to adult relatedness, which requires a fuller knowing and appreciation of another, as well as of self.

Our challenge might be to love that very infantile part of ourselves but realize that it is also anachronistic, non-adaptive to adult life, and unacceptable when acted out in adult relationship. This may be a case where we need to access the loving but firm adult/parent within ourselves that sets boundaries upon the demands of an infantile part of ourselves. This may allow for adult connection with another where we can share the fullness of ourselves but don’t burden the relationship with expectations that need to be grappled with within the self.

When Buddha speaks of loving compassion he speaks equally of detachment. Unconditional love—acceptance of all—does not mean attachment to all. (Attachment in this sense meaning having to engage in the acted-out entitlements of another.) In detachment, we can fully love and accept another yet insist that they manage their own infantilism.

Unconditional love is not unconditional license. Unconditional love is full acceptance of what is, while assuming full responsibility for integrating it into the self and into life at a level where life can receive it and help it to grow. Ironically, the key to unconditional love is complete loving acceptance of self while facing the conditional reality that we must grow up!

If we have been failed by those entrusted to connect us with unconditional love we must pick up the mantle of finding our way there on our own, beyond blame and bitterness. Our truest parent, Mother Earth, entrusts us with this journey as she evokes a healing process that requires deeper connectedness and love for that which has been rejected. If we are here we have been invited to partake in this great healing crisis, our own and that of the world now. It all begins with the journey of unconditional acceptance of the self.

Lovingly,

Chuck

 

Chuck’s Place: Melding

“…I lead not one but three lives, hers, mine, and our meld…” Robert Monroe writes these words as he recapitulates another lesson from sleep school where he encounters the death of his partner and the depth of his love for her. As I read his description I know his experience.

I have never missed Jeanne since she left physical form. Her transition was our completion for this physical leg of our journey together. It was our graduation. The truth is, what Monroe calls “our meld” is right here and now, with me in every decision I make and every action I take.

Meld of heaven and earth... - Photo by Jan Ketchel
Meld of heaven and earth…
– Photo by Jan Ketchel

I turn to our meld, that energetically merged being we created, and know “we” are in agreement as I come to a decision. At other times, I experience my separate self venturing into new life, kindling love in a new meld. Likewise, her separate self ventures in infinity on journeys I’m not privy to. From our original meld we granted each other the freedom to continue to evolve in both our separateness and our meld.

Our physical completion birthed new separate lives, and though the labor had its challenges the births we delivered ourselves to have been filled with joy. The results of our willingness to let go of where we once were has enabled our three selves—the meld of hers, mine, and ours that Monroe speaks of—to continue to evolve and circle back in the new constellations of the Soul Sisters of Jan and Jeanne, each of whom has shared separate journeys with me in this physical world and yet are joined in a new energetic relationship that allows us to live a magical possibility and share it with others. Anything is indeed possible!

What is required to achieve the magical, however, is detachment. I define detachment here as total acquiescence to the truth: Everything changes. If we can flow with the changes we remain connected and spawn new life and new adventures. If we resist and insist on holding onto an old relationship that has been completed, through death or in some other fashion, we simply are not ready to enter the next magical phase of relationship possibility and evolution.

Okay, you might say, but where’s the union, the sex, when your partner is no longer with you, no longer in the dense physical body state? How can a relationship evolve beyond physicality? Robert Monroe takes up this issue as well. As he explains in his out-of-body night school lesson:

“…that physical sexual drive is not the fundamental of this energy I don’t know what else to call but love, but one of the most common inducements to kindle the process… once the full flame is created, the inducement (sex) is not even the fuel that feeds it, but instead (becomes) a multileveled minor physical note in an infinite cord…”

Perhaps the greatest challenge of our species upon dying is letting go of the idea of our physical body’s desire for union. Many beings are so attached to this need that their energy bodies seek physical union after death, unaware that they have died and no longer have a physical body. Monroe states that of all the energetic bands that surround the earth this is the loudest and densest in population, a band of writhing energy populated by beings desperately seeking sexual union. Their insatiable desire for physical sexual union will only be fulfilled by new life in physical form, though they may writhe in this energy band for centuries before that new life occurs.

There is always the possibility of golden melding... - Photo by Jan Ketchel
There is always the possibility of golden melding…
– Photo by Jan Ketchel

The lesson Monroe brings back from his encounter with this above mentioned energy band is the actual minor role of sexual union in the true experience and development of love. He calls sex an inducement to, but not actually a vital component of, the process of evolving love. And love is the greatest natural resource of our planet, but it must be refined and evolved to its true grandeur—beyond the inducements of sex and romance—to become a multileveled vehicle for deepening journeys beyond the physical, into infinity.

Of course, while in physical/animal form we must reckon with the instinctual need to reproduce the species and experience the fulfillment of the carnal desires of the body. It is part of life here. However, as Monroe discovers, the true fuel for love is the development of conscious relationship after the romance has relaxed. The creation of meld requires commitment, deep transparency, acceptance, compassion, respect, honesty, resonance, sharing, and a mutual desire for ongoing growth.

Perhaps most important for meld is total acceptance of change. If we can love in full acceptance that things will not stay as they are now then nothing stands in the way of creating a meld that seeds separate lives and a deepening magical adventure in infinity.

Melding,
Chuck

Robert Monroe quotes from: Far Journeys p. 119

Chuck’s Place: Human Maturity Through Archetypal Encounter

My dear friend Michael Gellert proposed, in his book Modern Mysticism, that Jung’s revolutionary mapping of the psyche was the equivalent of a Copernican revelation of the true nature of the Self. Whereas Freud had mapped a psyche where the unconscious revolved around the ego as its “sun,” Jung placed the ego and the archetypes as planets that revolve around the much greater Self or Soul. Thus in Jung’s cosmology the ego, though a valid planet with consciousness, was nonetheless only one of many planets in the solar system of the Self.

Who knows what you might find in the solar system of the Self... - Photo by Jan Ketchel
Who knows what you might find in the solar system of the Self…
– Photo by Jan Ketchel

Building upon this cosmology, I would place the entire solar system of the Self—ego and archetypes—as the province of the energy body, that which gives access to the infinite part of the Self in the astral world and beyond. After all, the physical body is but a temporary appendage to the energy body, shed at the moment of its death.

The archetypes that revolve around the Self, in company with the ego, are personalities in their own rights, bringing both havoc and ecstasy to the experiences of the ego. When we identify our experiences as “powerful moods” or “overwhelming compulsions;” when we are “beside ourself;” when we feel “a part of ourself” or that “something possessed us,” we are acknowledging the experience of a meteoric hit from one of the revolving archetypes that has grazed the shores of planet ego, shaking it up, leaving reverberating waves of passion in its wake.

The simple truth is, we must encounter and grapple with the archetypes—they are part of who we are. They absolutely demand our attention, which means, they must be lived and integrated into our lives. If we refuse them, we become like the dry drunk who bitterly resents his or her shallow, lifeless existence cut off from the living waters of the Self.

The archetypes are the gods and goddesses of ancient peoples, residing in celestial realms. Jung’s psychic model internalizes these higher powers as entities that reside in all of us in the realm of the collective unconscious, in the same astral realm as the energy body, rather than as separate beings outside of the self.

Encountering the energy, power, and influences of the archetypes transforms our human life. The experience of falling in love, for instance, is nothing other than falling under the spell of a god/goddess archetype. Suddenly, we and our beloved shimmer in radiance, in a passionately-centered feeling of wholeness. This is hardly a human relationship. Real relationships take time and tremendous effort to evolve into a true loving connection.

Instant love and passion are the hallmarks of archetypal fairy dust. Nonetheless, encounters with archetypal energies draw us like moths to a flame. We are helpless in our longing for these encounters, through which we feel truly alive. Our challenge is to withstand the compulsions and emotions that enervate our ego states, as we are drawn to encounter our archetypal counterparts again and again.

If we allow those archetypal counterparts to rule us, we set ourselves up to regularly be drowned in a sea of emotions, or driven to passionate behaviors unfitting our real life circumstances. However, if we can hold our own, and learn to channel their energies properly, we are molded to maturity. These are the true rites of passage that will lead us beyond the powerful grasp of the gods and goddesses of the archetypal realm.

We go to our gods and goddesses enthralled,  like the bee to the golden rod... - Photo by Jan Ketchel
We go to our gods and goddesses enthralled, like the bee to the golden rod…
– Photo by Jan Ketchel

When a man projects the goddess Aphrodite onto a woman, he is overcome with awe and invariably shudders in the golden glow of her presence. He is indeed challenged to rise above his adolescent boy self and actually communicate with her. This is a step toward maturity. If she responds to his call, he is flooded with the benevolent, loving care he has not known since infancy and oneness with Mother. All needs and desires are met in this light-filled union. That is, until a real need is expressed by his goddess! Then the light goes out and he suddenly awakens to the power and control of the dark side of Mother. The archetypal fit with his goddess lover goes out of synch and he is left in the desert facing a real human woman, perceiving her as needy and demanding.

He has tasted the nectar of the archetypal goddess, which he now feels entitled to seek again elsewhere, as he is drawn to freedom, far from the gallows of commitment. Here, he is once again challenged to mature. Does he run? Or does he remain controlled by the dark side of the Mother archetype, whom he squarely encounters now in the eyes of his lover? Can he stick around and truly become related to his human partner? This is his next challenge of maturity.

To bear the fears, rages, and longings of the archetypes is to allow the ego to grow beyond the dramas and intensities of simply allowing the archetypes to live through us. Yes, we need their instinctive energies, but we must elevate them through our encounters to an integrated higher human level. In the example I have just given, that higher level is real love that partakes of archetypal energy but is grounded in human reality as a true connection with a human partner.

Human maturity requires archetypal encounters, but beware the energies unleashed when under the lure of the archetype. These are the waves that can pull us down and drag us through the sand of the ocean floor, without any certainty as to where we will land. Nonetheless, if we bring consciousness to bear upon the maya, or illusion, of the archetype, we may indeed find the path to maturity and fulfillment.

Outside the drama,
Chuck