The Integral Warrior: Final Men's Group

The introductory weekends are over. Two of them held in August and September have produced six men who are willing to step into the complete process of learning how to more fully embody The New Masculine over a 7 month period.

So what is this "New Masculine" that this process helps emerge? Both the bully and the new-age sensitive guy are archetypes that need to be transcended and morphed into a new arena of cooperation, or collective individualism. We need a fresh new way of looking at the issues that face us. The many ways we've been acting are not working.

More and more people are talking about the need for this next wave of thinking to arise as the only way we're going to solve the massive problems that are all converging on us at once, created by old paradigm thinking. These paradigms have left us with the problems of a crumbling world economy, peak oil, culture and the coming water wars, climate change, over population, and famine, just to name a few.

Just think how impossible it seems to change our crumbling financial and health/insurance systems. It pains me to think of the money we're throwing at the financial system to keep it afloat, in spite of it being unsustainable in it's present form. It won't be until the systems more or less collapse that we'll get any kind of meaningful change: when enough people wake up to "it just isn't working." The hope is that we don't totally collapse into the most basic of Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs.

Just as the old paradigms must die before new forms can emerge, so must men "die" to the old before they can emerge to the new.

By doing work around archetypes, shadow, initiation and ritual, men can dive deep into their own psyches, figure out for themselves what is no longer working for them, and how to emerge into a new way of being, what David Deida calls "3rd-stage masculine," that opens their hearts into a subtle, authentic way of living and loving that gifts the world with their presence.

Six men have agreed to take responsibility for their own evolution, fearlessly facing their inner demons, so that they may grow, mature, and step into the masculine role that the world so desperately needs at this time on the planet: that of the Integral Warrior, the Spiritual Warrior, the Shamanic Priest, this New masculine with integrated consciousness and awareness, loving themselves, their loved ones, and the entire connected planet.

I'll be doing a make-up session before we begin in late November for other men who would like to participate in this cutting-edge work around the New Masculine. I have room for four more men and I invite you or your loved ones to join us.

To find out more about The Integral Warrior: Embodying the New Masculine, click here.

The Shadow of the Spiritual Warrior

I've been wrestling with the shadow of the Spiritual Warrior. I've been wrestling with myself, as well, trying to define just what is the highest response to this unholy alliance between right-wing political ideologies and right-wing Christian movement in the United States today that confuses soldier and warrior, prophet and soldier. What's the highest conscious response from a moral, ethical, and spiritual place of being available to me?

Twenty-five years ago, when Pat Robertson and other radio hosts and televangelists began talking about a new political religion to create a global, Christian empire, Dr. James Luther Adams, a former ethics professor at Harvard Divinity School, who fled Germany in 1936, warned of the coming rise of American fascism and religion's role in that rise.

As one example among many, the Christian men's movement, The Promise Keepers, and it's founder, Dr. Tony Evans, a Dallas minister, talks about creating a Christian state. He teaches that America should be governed by biblical concepts and that "dominion" has been given over the "elect" to rule the Earth and America in particular. Dominionism has also found a home with George Bush, Tom Delay, Pat Robertson, and Zell Miller, and more recently Sarah Palin. Pat Robertson has stated, "our aim is to gain dominion over society."

Within the dominion context, Christ is portrayed as a warrior and is very appealing given the loss of manufacturing jobs, lack of affordable health care, the lack of educational opportunities and poor job security. The ideology is appealing because it offers hope and sanctifies their rage. One only has to look at the birthers showing up at town hall meetings, shouting everyone down and sometimes carrying guns, all with the intention to shut the other side up and intimidate.

Other manifestations of this pathological warped warrior ideology are America as Empire, anti-scientism, the popularity of the apocalyptic Left Behind novels (60 million copies and counting), the attacks on gays and lesbians reminiscent of early Nazi Germany, and the promulgation of the patriarchy in all elements of culture, religion, business, and politics.

In his book, The Hidden Spirituality of Men, Matthew Fox writes:

"Examining the the situation in Nazi Germany, Adams was very critical of liberals who talked of dialogue and inclusiveness and lacked the backbone to confront what was really going on. "The power and allure of evil and the cold reality of how the world worked was being ignored by such platitudes." He also criticized prominent research universities and the media in Nazi Germany; he considered these institutions too self-absorbed and compromised by their coziness with government and corporations, so that they were completely unwilling to raise the moral questions of justice and inequality."

It is this mentality that seems to be showing up in our own media, our own legislators, and, disappointingly, perhaps even in our president, who seems to think he can still pull everyone together in a well-meaning wave of bipartisanship. Unfortunately, the right-wing Christian Political movement has no intention of engaging in any kind of meaningful discussion.

Chris Hedges, Adams' student and a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist writes:

"All debates with the Christian right are useless. We cannot reach this movement. It does not want dialogue. It cares nothing for rational thought. It is not mollified because John Kerry prays or Jimmy Carter teaches Sunday School."

The biggest danger, he believes, is our complacency.

Also disappointing, from my perspective, is the the complacency I see within the Integral community. I fear we have not yet evolved far enough into a second-tier perspective that says, "while we recognize the essential contribution and value of each level of consciousness to the overall spiral of development, we also recognize that we must stand up and speak out against pathologies and shadow that threatens others."

Instead of a false war waged on a shadow projection of "secularism", what if we, as a nation and a world, made war on poverty, global warming, racism, and on forces that would co opt the true meaning of the spiritual warrior substituting hate for justice and love? There are plenty of injustices for real warriors to wage.

What are we waiting for?

(note: My deep thanks to Matthew Fox who contributed so much to this post through his book "The Hidden Spirituality of Men" and helped me formulate my thinking)

A channeled message from Sri Goji

(Gary's note: lately I've been channeling a semi-enlightened teacher who calls himself "Sri Goji." Goji is apparently from a small eastern country somewhere between India and Pakistan, although he refuses to be specific. He says he is always berry, berry happy to be anywhere. Sometimes he completely takes me over and makes me do stand-up in front of audiences...totally embarrassing me. Recently, he channeled this message for the people of America, while holding the Sacred Book, The Innaghadadavitta. It is said that Sri is my altered-ego)

My friends in America: I am in much distress over the ever-widening chasm developing between your citizenry. Your bad vibes are entering the cosmic stream, infecting the unconscious consciousness of the entire universe, and you're starting to piss some other beings off. You must realize that what you are going through is a test, and so far you're not doing too good, so they are getting testy. You are setting a bad example. Stop it!!

So many in your country are acting idiotic, being diabolic, nationalistic, moronic, dogmatic, absolutistic, evangelistic, fanatic, horrific, illogic, homophobic, imperialistic, jingoistic, nationalistic, problematic, sadistic, ethnocentric, and going ballistic with traumatic results!

Can't you see that's way too much "IC(k)?"

You don't cut it out, someone's going to go apocalyptic on you!

Here's what you need to do, it's berry, berry simple: You have to change your "IC(k)" to "I SEE."

You need to be more optimistic, organic, authentic, realistic, synergistic, dynamic, tantric, enthusiastic, ecstatic, world and universe-centric, galactic, strategic, and mentally orgasmic.

Do you "see" the lack of "IC(k)" in these words? They are "I SEE" oriented!

You know who you are. knock it off. It used to be the men who were doing this stuff, and it now palins....oops....get the "L" out....pains me to see this behavior from women, too. Get smart and live. Stay stupid and die off. It's your choice.

I'm going to have a corona.

Your friend and teacher,

Sri

(Gary's note, con't: Sri will be performing at the Priest-ess Convergence happening in Kansas City in September)

New Archetypes for the New Masculine

It's a bountiful universe in here. I've been thinking about traditional Jungian archetypes and how - and if - they fit in with the concept of the New Masculine, and suddenly, Matthew Fox's book, The Hidden Spirituality of Men, shows up.

In it, Fox explores ten archetypes, or metaphors, that he believes speak to a revival of the healthy masculine, "indeed, the Sacred Masculine."

"The authors of the classic work Green man point out that for Jung, 'an archetype will appear in new form to redress imbalances in society at a particular time when it is needed. According to this theory, therefore, the Green Man is rising up into our present awareness in order to counterbalance a lack in our attitude to Nature.'

Each of the ten archetypes in Fox's book is arising for the same reasons - to redress imbalances in our culture and in our very souls. For the latter flows from the former.

It's not that the former archetypes - especially the King and the Warrior - are no longer applicable, but that they, to0, are evolving as we evolve.

In my workshop, The integral Warrior: Embodying the New Masculine, we're going to be "killing off" the patriarchal properties of these former archetypes so the new archetypes can arise and take their place in a more evolved consciousness. For instance, the Green Man has a fierceness and a determination that parallels the Warrior, and suddenly the Warrior becomes the Spiritual Warrior that stands alongside the Green Man. Without saying so, it appears to me that the King archetype, a model of patriarchy, however soft and benevolent, is replaced by the Blue Man, or Father Sky, who models compassion and creativity, "cunning as snakes and wise as doves."

"The green man demands that men stand up. That men become men. Men have been stuck in a daze brought on by modern philosophy, consumerism, and a pseudo-masculine media-promoted identity. The green man calls us to stand for the love of the Earth and the health of future generations. Stand for the trees and the animals that are being destroyed and with them the sustainability of our own species. Stand for community and compassion rather than individual power and domination. Stand for the children and generations to come."

Joseph Gelfer, in his book "Numen, Oldmen: Contemporary Masculine Spiritualities and the Problem of Patriarchy," (reviewed here) is absolutely correct in his assessment of patriarchal stances in the evangelical, mythopoetical, and even the Integral approach to men's spirituality.

Fox's book helps the neo-men's movement (my term) take a fresh look at archetypes without the hard and soft patriarchies of the earlier movement.

For me, this is a major component of the New Masculine. This is where I want to go, and I'm going to take as many men with me as I can!

But If We Started Dating It Would Ruin Our Friendship Where I Ask You To Do Things And You Do Them

Gary's note: I found this at The Onion. It's hilarious and sad....

By Kimberly Pruitt
The Onion, June 9, 2009 | Issue 45•24

I really like you. I do. You're so nice, and sweet, and you listen to all my problems and respond with the appropriate compliments. But, well, I don't really see a relationship in our future. It would be terrible if we let sex destroy this great friendship we have where I get everything I want and you get nothing you want. Don't you think?

I knew you would understand. You always do.

We're so perfect as friends, you know? I can tell you anything, and you know you can always come to me anytime you need to hear me bitch about work or how ugly I feel. You wouldn't want to ruin a friendship like that just so you could be my boyfriend, and have me look at you with desire and longing in my eyes, if only once—would you? Of course not. Well, if we started dating, it would only complicate this wonderful setup I've got going here.

It's just…you're like my best friend, and I would hate for something you desperately want to change that. I mean, sure, we could go on some dates, maybe mess around a little and finally validate the six years you've spent languishing in this platonic nightmare, but then what? How could we ever go back to the way we were, where I take advantage of your clear attraction to me so I can have someone at my beck and call? That part of our friendship means so much to me.

No. We are just destined to be really, really good friends who only hang out when I don't have a boyfriend, but still need male attention to boost my fragile and all-consuming ego.

Anything can happen once you bring romance in. Think about how awful my last relationship was at the end, remember? The guy I'd call you crying about at 3 a.m. because he wouldn't answer my texts? The guy I met at the birthday party you threw me? I had insanely passionate sex with him for four months and now we don't even talk anymore. God, I would die if something like that happened to us.

Plus, ick, can you even imagine getting naked in front of each other? I've known you so long, you're more like a brother that I've drunkenly made out with twice and never mentioned again. It'd be way too weird. And if we did, then whenever you'd come shopping with me, or go to one of my performances or charity events, or take me for ice cream when I've had a bad day at work, you'd be looking at me like, "I've seen her breasts." God, I can't think of anything more awkward that that.

Oh, before I forget, my mom says hi.

Anyway, you would totally hate me as your girlfriend. I'd be all needy and dramatic and slowly growing to love you. If I was your girlfriend, I would never be able to tell you all about the other asshole guys I date and pretend I don't see how much it crushes you. Let's never lose that. That's what makes us us.

Don't worry. You're so funny and smart and amazing, any girl but me would be lucky to date you. You'll find someone, I know it. And when you do, I'll be right by your side to suddenly become all flirty and affectionate with you in front of her, until she grows jealous and won't believe it when you say we're just friends. But when she dumps you, that's just what we'll be.

Best friends. Friends forever.

Calling In The Beloved: A Message To Men

I knew I was on to something with my new workshop, Calling in the Beloved, but so far, the responses are far exceeding my expectations!

So what's the problem? So far, everyone signing up a woman!

If I were single this would not be a problem! But I'm not, and as much as I'd like to model the Divine Masculine for these wonderful women, you men are missing out on a fantastic opportunity!

If you're a single man, and you'd like to be in relationship with an amazing conscious woman, what better place to start than at a workshop about how to do just that?

Now, I'm not promising you'll meet the woman of your dreams, any more than I'm promising the women who've already signed up that they'll meet the man of their dreams, but if you're looking for a place to start, this is it!

The worst that could happen is that you'll meet other conscious singles who are looking for the same thing you're looking for, who you can dialogue with and create mutually beneficial support systems!

So, come on guys! Step up on to a committed path to finding the person you always knew you wanted in your life. That's how I found my beloved, and I'd love to help you find yours!

Gary

For more information see www.garystamper.com/beloved.htm

Numen, Old Men: Contemporary Masculine Spiritualities and the Problem of Patriarchy, by Joseph Gelfer .

I've just finished reading Numen, Old Men: Contemporary Masculine Spiritualities and the Problem of Patriarchy, by Joseph Gelfer .

The back cover states that all of the earlier men's movements, mythopoetic, evangelical, and to a lesser extent, the Catholic men's movement are little more than a thinly veiled patriarchal spirituality, promoting a heteropatriarchal spirituality by appealing to to neo-jungian archetypes of a combative and oppressive nature.

it then examines Wilber's Integral Spirituality which "aims to honor both the masculine and the feminine, but which privileges the former to the extent where it becomes another masculine spirituality, with all its inherent patriarchal problems."

He then offers gay spirituality as a form of masculine spirituality which "to a larger degree resists patriarchal tendencies, suggesting a queering of spirituality could be useful for all men, gay and straight."

I've reviewed it on Amazon.com and thought some of you might be interested in my review and reading the book.

My review:

This is a valuable, ambitious book, but Joseph Gelfer makes huge leaps of assumptions around a lot of it. For example, Gelfer reaches a conclusion that because [Integral Spirituality] author Ken Wilber talks about seeing perspectives from the 50,000 foot level, he must be guilty of the "up and out" directionality transcendence attributed to the masculine qualities Gelfer then rejects. Gelfer goes on to say that the 50,000 foot view equates with the "thrust of jet engines, again technology (masculine) dominating nature (feminine)," dampening the good parts of his message by often trekking into fantastic conclusions.

Gelfner also applies a very limited use of archetypes, choosing to put emphasis on only one interpretation of those archetypes through the evangelical, mythopoetical, and integral use of them, only finally touching on a solution at the end. Granted, that's the way they are represented in most men's work, but not all (disclosure: I facilitate men's groups using archetypes and shadow). He also only illustrates one example of feminine archetypes: Talk about favoring the masculine!

It's too bad, because Gelfer has a lot to say that's important that gets lost in the exaggeration, loose connection, and stretched assumptions. I'm admittedly a big Wilber fan, although I don't agree with everything he says. His assessment of Wilber as the masculine gunslinger is dead on, but his conclusions, again, are off. Wilber's tirade about his critics seem more about shadow than masculine dominating Hierarchy. Using Integral Theory and Spiral Dynamics, it's easy to imagine Gelfer directly in the middle of Relativistic Pluralism. Worth reading? Yes, but only to gain some insights on other perspectives and to sharpen critical thinking.

For a deeper discussion on the book, including author Joseph Gelfer, visit http://www.realitysandwich.com/masculine_spiritualities_and_problem_patriarchy