Wonderfully written Claudia. It's clear that you've considered this carefully and come at with years of experience both as a mother and as a licensed couples therapist and psychotherapist.
I go back to John Wineland and his distillation of David Deida's philosophy of the feminine and masculine. There's so much alignment between your view and his that it might help to see if the two can be integrated. Not that I want you to change your view but I want to incorporate complementary views for an expanded approach.
If you have objections to Deida's lens, I'd love to hear you out. It seems all models are limited and contain truth, exclusion of truth, and distortion. It also seems that I bring my own biases that color my interpretation of the model, so I'm likely off on my perception and would love your take.
Thank you for commenting, Kevin. I'll need to brush up on his philosophy. However, in the meantime, I agree with John. Please share your interpretation of his views for our consideration. :)
I am proposing a new orientation that foregrounds maternal skills, often associated with feminine aspect, that align with the broad focus of attention linked to the right hemisphere. This orientation underscores interconnectedness and love—qualities especially crucial for the times we are in. The aim is to harmonize this right hemispheric attention with the narrow focus of attention of the left hemisphere, often associated with the masculine aspect, as I believe it has been disproportionately favored and thus, has contributed to the challenges we now face.
This is so necessary, Claudia. I see it as the only way of thinking, acting, being that has any chance of moving our species forward. Marianne Williamson talks a lot about leadership based on love; having love be the bottom line of any decision made and action taken. At least that is the message that provides the foundation for her campaign rhetoric...and relatively few people take her seriously. There are other reasons for that, but I do see her working hard to get her message out via the political process. Whether or not people support her as a candidate, her message is worthy of consideration as we look for knew paradigms of leadership.
Wonderfully written Claudia. It's clear that you've considered this carefully and come at with years of experience both as a mother and as a licensed couples therapist and psychotherapist.
I go back to John Wineland and his distillation of David Deida's philosophy of the feminine and masculine. There's so much alignment between your view and his that it might help to see if the two can be integrated. Not that I want you to change your view but I want to incorporate complementary views for an expanded approach.
If you have objections to Deida's lens, I'd love to hear you out. It seems all models are limited and contain truth, exclusion of truth, and distortion. It also seems that I bring my own biases that color my interpretation of the model, so I'm likely off on my perception and would love your take.
Kevin, I would like to invite you to write a brief summary of Deida's ideas.
Good idea -- I'll try to summarize in a post in our MN space.
Thank you for commenting, Kevin. I'll need to brush up on his philosophy. However, in the meantime, I agree with John. Please share your interpretation of his views for our consideration. :)
Wonderful article, I continue to learn from you, Claudia.
And me from you.
I am proposing a new orientation that foregrounds maternal skills, often associated with feminine aspect, that align with the broad focus of attention linked to the right hemisphere. This orientation underscores interconnectedness and love—qualities especially crucial for the times we are in. The aim is to harmonize this right hemispheric attention with the narrow focus of attention of the left hemisphere, often associated with the masculine aspect, as I believe it has been disproportionately favored and thus, has contributed to the challenges we now face.
This is so necessary, Claudia. I see it as the only way of thinking, acting, being that has any chance of moving our species forward. Marianne Williamson talks a lot about leadership based on love; having love be the bottom line of any decision made and action taken. At least that is the message that provides the foundation for her campaign rhetoric...and relatively few people take her seriously. There are other reasons for that, but I do see her working hard to get her message out via the political process. Whether or not people support her as a candidate, her message is worthy of consideration as we look for knew paradigms of leadership.