on the spectrum but it's not autism
Dec. 10th, 2025 01:06 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
dreamingwithfairies"Among the naked gods and goddesses who amuse themselves there with nectar and ambrosia, take note of one goddess who, though surrounded by such joy and amusement, always wears a suit of armor, a helmet on her head and keeps her spear in her hand.
It is the goddess of Wisdom." - Heinrich Heine "On the History of Religion and Philosophy in Germany"
I want to map WHY spirituality and religion was necessary, that it was a form of internal rebellion. Growing up secular, I was bombarded with media, magazines and cultural and social expectations of womanhood, with no positive role models, no woman I could respect. My instinct was never to blame men/patriarchy, I merely saw women as too eager to please, that they misused their freedom, and saw them often competing with each other and be jealous of each other - basically that emancipation is an illusion and we're still oppressed - psychologically and spiritually. Now it was on us to recognise it and overcome it, to learn how to handle freedom wisely, instead of demonising men for doing what they've been used to being the norm. They have their own programming to overcome - even Kurt Cobain was painfully aware of it. I did not see hedonism as empowerment - I saw it as confusion over the meaning and value of what it means to be a woman, especially in an egalitarian society. Yet I also knew that reducing a woman's value to her reproductive capacity was also deeply wrong - after all, no one judges a man if he does not want kids or if his libertine behavior might someday be an embarrasment to his future child. No one pressures men like this over behavior, fashion or life choices. The worst a straight man might get is being accused of being gay if he strays too much outside the harshness, vulgarity, emotional detachment, intellectual barrenness and boring fashion that was sold as stereotypically "masculine". But I'm not here to talk about men and their social programming.
I want to map WHY spirituality and religion was necessary, that it was a form of internal rebellion. Growing up secular, I was bombarded with media, magazines and cultural and social expectations of womanhood, with no positive role models, no woman I could respect. My instinct was never to blame men/patriarchy, I merely saw women as too eager to please, that they misused their freedom, and saw them often competing with each other and be jealous of each other - basically that emancipation is an illusion and we're still oppressed - psychologically and spiritually. Now it was on us to recognise it and overcome it, to learn how to handle freedom wisely, instead of demonising men for doing what they've been used to being the norm. They have their own programming to overcome - even Kurt Cobain was painfully aware of it. I did not see hedonism as empowerment - I saw it as confusion over the meaning and value of what it means to be a woman, especially in an egalitarian society. Yet I also knew that reducing a woman's value to her reproductive capacity was also deeply wrong - after all, no one judges a man if he does not want kids or if his libertine behavior might someday be an embarrasment to his future child. No one pressures men like this over behavior, fashion or life choices. The worst a straight man might get is being accused of being gay if he strays too much outside the harshness, vulgarity, emotional detachment, intellectual barrenness and boring fashion that was sold as stereotypically "masculine". But I'm not here to talk about men and their social programming.
Can women be both respected as humans and desired as such? Can you have filthy fantasies of the same person you love and admire? Why is culture so focused on exploiting women's sexuality but not men's? Why don't women objectify men to the same degree? (They kinda do now but not back in the Y2K era) These were questions I had as a little girl, trying to imagine myself as a woman someday.
I did not want to shrink myself for anybody. I did not want to become an object of desire; I wanted to be seen as a person first. But my romantic sensitivity seemed incompatible with my strong sexual drive; the wide variety of activities I did and/or fantasised were at odds with the nobility and depth of my emotional yearning. I was torn, I couldn't ever have both. Neither did I want to wear uncomfortable shoes or dresses or sit in front of the mirror doing elaborate make up and hair, like my mother did every single morning for at least an hour, while men can just get a buzzcut and look hella cool. I understand grooming and looking good is important, but all I ever saw was women's excessive need to look good for other people, not for themselves. I always thought women don't need much to look beautiful, I didn't understand the constant pressure for perfection that didn't even look worth it. I didn't understand this need to paint the face or wear clothes that are revealing far too much or is too tight or has flimsy fabrics. Most of the clothes I wore as a child were handpicked by women and I hated almost all of them because of the fabrics. Did I complain? No, because I had no choice but to dress well. I was rarely allowed to be casual or messy, even as a kid. I was trained not to get muddy, dirty, not to spill anything. The only times I had a little more freedom to just be a kid was when I visited the countryside to be with my grandparents. The same goes with hair. Whether it's my mother, grandma or babysitter - they were fixated on my hair. I was like a doll almost. Always tightly braided, tied up, curled - you name it. I bore it. I had to because I was a girl and girls are supposed to look pretty. I quietly vowed myself that when I grow up I'll always wear my hair down because of how fucking good it felt at the end of the night - I associated loose hair with finally relaxing and being left alone. And how nice it is not to have tugging and pulling and the gross texture of hairspray to annoy me.
The truth is, I'm not against beauty, I envy it and wish I understood it better. I only reject the idea that it's feminine, same with hair and fashion. That's art, that's aesthetics and self-expression. It can be conformity or rebellion. It can be individualistic or part of a movement or trend. It took me a long time to see that because it was so enforced upon me, I had no choice.
Then came strict Catholic school with its obsession with dictating the uniform code. It went from one extreme to another for me. From adult women dolling me up in the latest fashions, to wearing the most dull grey uniform that was literally designed with conformity in mind. Make up was regulated, hair was regulated, nails were regulated, footwear, accessories and piercing were regulated - all were punishable if they did not fit into the fine print of the code. They did not fuck around either. I was once ordered by a teacher to tie up my hair because it was in the rules, and I felt severely wronged and was seething so bad it made me cry, after which I refused to go back to school for at least two weeks. What does my hair have to do with my education? Why did appearances matter so much even in school?
Eventually I gave in. I simply began hating the fact I was female, and the physical changes in adolescence didn't help. I had no role models, no women I could look up to. It fed my deep-seated resentment to the very concept. Going to a girls-only school during this time when I also became separated from male friends I had since childhood made me feel even more isolated from who I really was. Since now my appearance wasn't regulated because of "male gaze" it was fundamentally because of what I was defined by, something unchangeable. And I went to a school that prided itself on its "sisterhood" spirit. Individuality was actively repressed from every direction while I was being taught about women's rights in the same breath.
The contrast between my early childhood and my teens is so jarring when I look back, it makes me sick. I had no room for self-expression - I was always being controlled and regulated in one form or another. I did try to rebel in little ways but it wasn't worth it - anyone who ever tried was either reduced to tears and embarrassed in front of the class or had to waste their time in detention and have their parents called. I told myself when I graduate, I'll wear whatever I want and they will definitely not be fucking skirts. But by then I genuinely had no idea what my style even was anymore or what would suit me. I wore whatever felt good only to end up hating it later or realising I look like shit. I never had a chance to experiment and the one time I tried sewing I hated it (though I think I have no choice but to learn now because the clothes for sale are still SHIT ontop of being ill-fitting). I only wore what was comfortable after school. I didn't go out often but when I did I was uncomfortable in my "party" clothes.
The only place I found some relief was online, which I was getting more into. Exploring visual aesthetics, sharing content, designing digital spaces and presentation was cathartic to me. I cycled through different aesthetics and identities every few months for years but nothing satisfied me. Eventually I spiralled into an identity crisis that came to a tipping point in 2019/2020. I understood aesthetics conceptually but was completely at a loss as to how to apply it practically or if it even matters, if surface presentation means anything. I envied anyone who was coherent and consistent. Honestly, I still struggle with it, but I've decided to try building a unique aesthetic from scratch instead of joining a pre-existing trend. I haven't figured it out, it's difficult...
Who am I and why is being a woman the one thing that seems to throw me into such a crisis? I used to wonder if I might be trans or something, but I've never wanted to be a man. I just like the wider freedom of expression and acceptance they have, how they're allowed to be rough and mischievous and passionate and as intense and aggressive as they like. I also think having a penis is preferable to having a vagina ANY day of the week, but I digress.
The female experience is defined by having to constantly perform for an audience because you're always being watched and judged and desired and projected on, for better or worse. There is no avoiding it. There is no escaping it - the only solution is to face it and continue being radically expressive and authentic as possible. Those who see you as a whole, see you. Those who do not probably never will.
In those severely restricted environments, I had no choice but to turn inward to preserve my independent spirit. I refused to be moulded - I would bide my time. I couldn't prove it but I just knew society was sick on many levels, including women. From the twisted sexual objectification on one hand, to the chaste domestication on the other. I felt I was caught between growing up to be a "Madonna" (wife/mother) and being a "Mistress" (whore/temptress), and I needed to figure out if this was a legitimate choice, a spectrum, or something else entirely. Not once did I consider feminism or socialism as places to find answers - instead I asked what's hidden in the collective consciousness? What myths about womanhood have we been carrying? I wondered what women actually believed and what was imposed or inherited. What lies outside Judeo-Christian programming? Is there a different version of femininity that I can identify with? Is femininity and masculinity (i.e. gender expression) a cultural construct that can be deconstructed or defied, the way the moon is masculine or feminine depending on which culture we look to? What's healthy and what's sick when it comes to female sexuality? I went on a quest to find the "divine feminine"...
My icon currently is a cropped picture from a painting of Mary Magdalene and the crucified Christ. Her bare shoulder is exposed; she is wiping his bloodied nailed feet with her hair - a callback to when she bathed his feet and dried it with her hair. The symbolism is meant to be both erotically provocative (for the time) as well as achingly devotional. Mary Magdalene was a prostitute who was taken off the streets and into the fold of Christ. Through him, she learned devotion - no one else mattered anymore but Him, all that she was before was forgiven and forgotten. Though still, her sensuality did not disappear, it merely changed form. Jesus ended up having an unusually close relationship with Mary Magdalene, which is written both in canon Bible and the Apocrypha. She was the first one he appeared to after his resurrection. He treated her with such exception that even the apostles were envious and they did not count her as one of them (despite the fact that she was also technically an apostle who has her own gospel, but she was a woman...). In the Apocrypha (gospels redacted from the Bible) she received knowledge and wisdom from Jesus that he did not share with the others. Though this may be interpreted in different ways, it is undeniable that a deeper bond existed between them. It fascinates me. Is Mary Magdalene the Middle Way? The one who can be both the Madonna and the Mistress? Was she the first Nun - the first of God's brides? Did Jesus love her more than all the others - why did he have such a preference for this woman? Did he desire her both as the son of Man and love her as the son of God? I need to know, for some reason.
My icon currently is a cropped picture from a painting of Mary Magdalene and the crucified Christ. Her bare shoulder is exposed; she is wiping his bloodied nailed feet with her hair - a callback to when she bathed his feet and dried it with her hair. The symbolism is meant to be both erotically provocative (for the time) as well as achingly devotional. Mary Magdalene was a prostitute who was taken off the streets and into the fold of Christ. Through him, she learned devotion - no one else mattered anymore but Him, all that she was before was forgiven and forgotten. Though still, her sensuality did not disappear, it merely changed form. Jesus ended up having an unusually close relationship with Mary Magdalene, which is written both in canon Bible and the Apocrypha. She was the first one he appeared to after his resurrection. He treated her with such exception that even the apostles were envious and they did not count her as one of them (despite the fact that she was also technically an apostle who has her own gospel, but she was a woman...). In the Apocrypha (gospels redacted from the Bible) she received knowledge and wisdom from Jesus that he did not share with the others. Though this may be interpreted in different ways, it is undeniable that a deeper bond existed between them. It fascinates me. Is Mary Magdalene the Middle Way? The one who can be both the Madonna and the Mistress? Was she the first Nun - the first of God's brides? Did Jesus love her more than all the others - why did he have such a preference for this woman? Did he desire her both as the son of Man and love her as the son of God? I need to know, for some reason.
Hence this rant, which I needed to get out of my system before I can detach myself enough to do objective analysis and research. I can't be the only one who has questioned what it means to be a woman... while having that question be entirely divorced from any association with the gender concept specifically (that is, whether biological males can be women). This is about what THE PROGRAMME says women are "supposed" to be, and digging through that to understand what the fuck I've been fighting against (or aligned with) this whole damn time.
