Recently, a local mailing list has been discussing workshops and events requiring secrecy about goings-on. HAI workshops have been often cited, although there have been others. Thread-drift has taken it into a debate on gender-balancing, with the practice being questioned -- or at least regarded as a het meet-market provision rather than something germane to dealing with emotional intimacy. I have perfectly valid reasons for requiring gender-balance that have nothing to do with finding new relationships...
I've been watching this discussion for awhile. I can think of a perfectly valid reason for workshops like HAI to look for gender balance without it becoming a het "meet-market" or play-party. And I'm being serious here, not trying to joke or push anyone's buttons, and bullying or flaming responses will be duly ignored.
In my own experience, it is vastly easier to open up to the opposite gender. Testosterone and aggressive tendencies make a difference, apart from the plumbing. (And in a clothing-optional environment, I wouldn't feel comfortable being up-close to same-gender plumbing, either.) I personally find women to be much safer for emotional intimacy exercises, activities that make myself vulnerable. A workshop involving love and intimacy issues that was, say, 2/3 male would be an instant no-go on my part. Not because of slim pick-up prospects, but because it would be hard for me to find trustworthy exercise partners (and hence the purpose of the workshop would be negated, and a waste of time and money).
I view all males as competitors and potential threats. Neutral at best. I feel that any sign of weakness shown to the a member of the same gender is likely to be used against me, or reduce my status in his eyes. I view women as colleagues and cooperative, potentially supportive, possibly friendly, and only hostile when demonstrated by their actions. Undoubtedly this stems from childhood experiences (gangs of boys routinely physically beat me up, while girls stood by... and older boys sexually molested me, early on) but the level of visceral mistrust of other males is sufficiently strong that even trying to work on these issues with other males has not been possible for me, therapy-wise or otherwise. (And I've tried.)
A big reason why I haven't tried a HAI Level 1 isn't the gender balance -- which I'd see as essential for emotional safety -- but that I've heard that there are exercises involving same-gender emotional intimacy, and that scares me. Ironically, considering that this thread began with discussions of the advisability of event-secrecy.
I'm taking a risk by revealing this much personal stuff in a public forum, but I thought that it was relevant to non-sexual motivations for looking for gender balance at events. Attempts to use the above to mock or humiliate me will be tossed in the bit-bucket (especially from members of the same gender ;-).
I've been watching this discussion for awhile. I can think of a perfectly valid reason for workshops like HAI to look for gender balance without it becoming a het "meet-market" or play-party. And I'm being serious here, not trying to joke or push anyone's buttons, and bullying or flaming responses will be duly ignored.
In my own experience, it is vastly easier to open up to the opposite gender. Testosterone and aggressive tendencies make a difference, apart from the plumbing. (And in a clothing-optional environment, I wouldn't feel comfortable being up-close to same-gender plumbing, either.) I personally find women to be much safer for emotional intimacy exercises, activities that make myself vulnerable. A workshop involving love and intimacy issues that was, say, 2/3 male would be an instant no-go on my part. Not because of slim pick-up prospects, but because it would be hard for me to find trustworthy exercise partners (and hence the purpose of the workshop would be negated, and a waste of time and money).
I view all males as competitors and potential threats. Neutral at best. I feel that any sign of weakness shown to the a member of the same gender is likely to be used against me, or reduce my status in his eyes. I view women as colleagues and cooperative, potentially supportive, possibly friendly, and only hostile when demonstrated by their actions. Undoubtedly this stems from childhood experiences (gangs of boys routinely physically beat me up, while girls stood by... and older boys sexually molested me, early on) but the level of visceral mistrust of other males is sufficiently strong that even trying to work on these issues with other males has not been possible for me, therapy-wise or otherwise. (And I've tried.)
A big reason why I haven't tried a HAI Level 1 isn't the gender balance -- which I'd see as essential for emotional safety -- but that I've heard that there are exercises involving same-gender emotional intimacy, and that scares me. Ironically, considering that this thread began with discussions of the advisability of event-secrecy.
I'm taking a risk by revealing this much personal stuff in a public forum, but I thought that it was relevant to non-sexual motivations for looking for gender balance at events. Attempts to use the above to mock or humiliate me will be tossed in the bit-bucket (especially from members of the same gender ;-).
no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 08:03 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 08:12 am (UTC)On the other hand, he's male, not nearly as genderfucked as I am, and yeah, he did meet a sexual partner there. When deciding whether it would be good for me, I must realize that I don't have (or, in the latter case, expect or want) those things on my own balance sheet.
no subject
Date: 2003-10-27 11:29 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 08:17 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 11:29 am (UTC)Up until that recent thread, I hadn't really thought about the reasons for needing gender balance in the workshops, it just seemed so "right" while in them. Partly it may be that I went from the "what is this HAI thing you're talking about?" to attending my level 1 in under 2 weeks... I had just been dumped in a very bad way by who I thought was the love of my life and my only chance for a relationship. Level 1 did more than get me out of my funk, it showed me that there was more to life and love than I had thought possible.
In my experience, women benefit from the gender balance at least as much as men do. And for neither does it have to do with mate selection. While they (HAI) understand that most people (who take the workshops, anyway) are hetero, there is no exclusion of gay, lesbian, bi, or trans-gendered people. They are most definitely included. The point is that most (all?) people relate differently to each gender (even if it is an unconscious difference), and so you are given the opportunity to see how you relate, and change how you relate if you want to. I found it challenging, and very, very powerful and enlightening.
BTW, what's going on in this thread, and the one on the mailing list is precisely why HAI requests secrecy about the exercises -- people hear rumors about what goes on, and because of the story in their head about it, which is completely out of context, they fear what is going to happen, and the fear keeps them from being able to get what they might otherwise get from the exercise, or the whole workshop if the fear is pervasive enough. Though the primary reason for secrecy is out of respect for the privacy of the participants (among other reasons, just like there are places/people that many poly people may not feel comfortable being "out" to, there are people who may have legitimate reasons for not wanting to be "outed" about having taken a personal growth workshop...). It is difficult to believe, having not experienced it, how absolutley _safe_ you feel doing even scary things in the workshop (in this context, "scary things" are really just oppotunities for growth). For me, it's taken a while, but I'm learning how to take that safety with me.
If you want to make your own opinion from your own experience, go to an intro night, it's cheaper than a movie (free, that is). See the HAI web page (http://www.hai.org/) for dates and locations.
HAI isn't for everyone. But for me, right now, it is definitely the right thing
no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 02:14 pm (UTC)Or at least being conscious of those differences. I'd argue that my relational differences were seared in by sufficient trauma that they would require more than a 30-min exercise to undo... detect, perhaps.
I suppose that the workshop would be safe at a fundamental level -- no one would be likely to attack me physically -- and I could always choose to skip the uncomfortable parts.
I went to a day-long PTI once, so I have a little basis for personal opinion.
Thanks for weighing in, and I'm glad that it has had strongly-positive effects for you :-).
no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 04:23 pm (UTC)And detection _is_ the first step, probably the biggest one. If you don't know what is going on (even with yourself), then you get constantly blind-sided by unconscious behaviors and beliefs. Once detected (and acknowleged), then you can decide what , if anything, to do about it.
I know something about that "relational stuff seared in". And you're right -- it takes more than a 30-minute exercise to do anything about it. I haven't run into anybody who claims that real personal growth can be done in an instant (though "AHAs" about issues may indeed come in an instant -- but it takes time and work to do something about it). I've been doing HAI for more than 2 years now. I've found a lot of (relational and other emotional) stuff that was so deeply buried that it's taken that long to find it and "dig it out" and start to work on it. At times, personal growth can feel like a full-time job -- too bad you can't get paid for doing it! Though for me it certainly does pay off, though you do have to think of it as an investment.
And thanks, Brian, for going to the PTI to check things out for yourself.
no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 08:04 am (UTC)I just wish the women got paid for coming in and enabling guys' intimacy. I'm tired of being seen as someone who will provide something for nothing (traditional girl role). :( (NOT a jab at you -- a jab at the event organizers.)
no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 08:15 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 08:47 am (UTC)That's it exactly. Perhaps the value is small compared to, say, the value of the workshop. That's fine. Whatever it is, I'd just like the fact that I'm getting less out of the thing (and providing more) to be recognized.
This is a theme in the workplace, too. Y'know all those types who have no friends/family outside work, so they do all their social contact through parking their butts in other people's offices for hours? Unless a workplace fires people for such behavior, or refuses to hire single engineers, providing a listening ear for those people is a service that the workplace is presuming someone on staff will offer. Periodic service makes the talker-people productive again. But the workplace never compensates for it. Instead, it's a negative w.r.t. the listener's (other, task-based) performance.
no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 01:39 pm (UTC)I recognize the type, unfortunately. If I were constantly having to work unpaid overtime to catch up on my tasks for time spent providing a listening ear, I'd be annoyed... I'd probably take measures like closing my office door, but I'm lucky enough to not be in cubeland. It becomes a boundary issue after awhile...
no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 08:20 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 08:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 08:46 am (UTC)sometimes I feel uncomfortable when anyone treats me differently because I'm female. I'm not somehow better, or more honorable, or more trustworthy because I'm female.
Yes, that. Exactly.
no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 01:49 pm (UTC)That said regarding nature, there are a couple of "nurture" issues. The personal one for me is given above, as far as my own past conditioning that males-are-scumbags goes.
At an indirect level, though, it is hard to overlook the effects of social conditioning. Women are pressured to be more emotionally open, to be nurturing, to be cooperative. Men are pressured to be rugged and emotionally closed, to play rough and aggressively, to be selfish. Various individuals of both/whatever genders absorb or resist these external messages to varying degrees... but all other things being equal, and not knowing the individuals in question, socialization means that I'd still rather take my chances opening up to a woman than to the man next to her at the bar.
no subject
Date: 2003-10-27 10:54 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 08:42 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 01:53 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 07:34 pm (UTC)Brian, friendship with you is not an INCONVENIENCE!
(Though sometimes it can be ANNOYING, when you pull this sort of self-deprecating crap...)
no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 10:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-10-27 05:20 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-10-27 09:42 pm (UTC)Once more with feeling
Date: 2003-10-27 08:21 am (UTC)Re: Once more with feeling
Date: 2003-10-27 08:32 am (UTC)Re: Once more with feeling
Date: 2003-10-27 08:53 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 09:35 am (UTC)I don't know if you're oppressing your female friends. But if you confide in, or open up emotionally to people who INVITE that, REQUEST that, or RECIPROCATE that... then it is probably welcome or a peer exchange.
You might want to ask. Check in to make sure.
I feel like in MY conversations with you, we both have checked in with each other about increases in levels of confiding, or revealing. And that was cool.
I am sad about this thing (I've seen it with other guys, not just you) where guys feel they can't 'go deep, or vulnerable' with other men. These same men reveal their amazingly wonderful sensitivities to ME, but are unable to connect with those of their own gender that way. IS it just a het fear about getting too close, in a mindset where 'closeness = sexualtiy'?
thanks for this post. You say some brave things out loud.
hugs
no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 02:05 pm (UTC)And you and I have both been careful about checking in... I'm just a pathetically-slow typist ;-).
I'm not scared of other men's sexuality, as much as I'm afraid of something nonconsensual happening. Recall your post today about expressing women's sexuality, then worrying that some guy would come back and rape you as a result? I have that twinge of (irrational) fear every time I'm in close physical proximity with another guy. Because things have happened before (albeit, long ago). I've been fooled. I've been attacked and physically beaten after things I confided in confidence were repeated to others. I've been terrorized on a daily basis (again, long ago) by gangs of five or six males, some of whom later confessed that they joined in out of fear that they'd be singled-out themselves otherwise.
But I'm atypical, I'm sure.
no subject
Date: 2003-10-27 05:15 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-10-27 05:25 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-10-27 08:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 01:03 pm (UTC)I just wish the women got paid for coming in and enabling guys' intimacy. I'm tired of being seen as someone who will provide something for nothing (traditional girl role). :( (NOT a jab at you -- a jab at the event organizers.)
That would presume that the women were there ONLY to facilitate guys' intimacy. They are not. Both genders are there to help the other, and to help themselves. Each person is there to do their own growing. That includes exploration of how they relate to the opposite sex, to the same sex, to a group, to individuals, to "nothing" and to themselves. Gender balancing the event ensures that each person gets to experience each one of these states.
no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 01:21 pm (UTC)I disagree that it needs to presume "only". I was unclear, I guess. Here's what I meant: if male attendees feel as Brian does, and I do not feel as Brian does, then my presence (presuming I read as female) is providing a service that the event organizers need in order to give the male attendees the experience desired. This is an imbalance, and I'd like to see it recognized in some way.
Perhaps that way is "gee, CJ, we believe you will get something -- perhaps a different something -- out of relating specifically to guys in this setting". For me personally, I rather doubt it, because relating to guys is what I do my entire @#$!ing life. Relating to gals is the unusual bit. But I could see, if other women are not like me, why they'd think this was balanced. It just would be a slightly different net total for me than for most.
no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 02:03 pm (UTC)Yes, I think this is true. I think that many, though not necessarily most, women are not like you in that regard. For many women, men could be seen as being there to provide the unique experience of relating in an emotional way to men in a SAFE environment. Therefore, the men could be seen as providing a service, just as much as the women could. I don't think either gender is there at the expense of the other. Each gender has something unique to offer, and something unique to gain.
OTOH, it does sound like this is not necessarily a good format for YOU, CJ. *If* you were interested in doing personal-growth work, work on emotional intimacy, etc., and if one of your goals were to relate to the gals (the "unusual bit" as you put it), I might suggest you check out the women-only events at Body Electric. Again, I haven't done these workshops myself, but I've done an "intro" for this one, and I know others who have done the full week women's retreats, returning with glowing reports.
no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 02:16 pm (UTC)[nod] I can definitely imagine that.
OTOH, it does sound like this is not necessarily a good format for YOU, CJ.
Yeah, could be. OR, perhaps it is a good format despite a thing I regard as a negative. I won't know unless I choose to go. The Body Electric events (interesting! I'll check it out) might be a place I choose to try FIRST. :-)
I know others who have done the full week women's retreats, returning with glowing reports.
Thanks for the info!
no subject
Date: 2003-10-26 07:38 pm (UTC)So true. You don't know until you try! Sometimes it's the things you think of as "negatives" that bring the biggest returns.
If you do take the BE events, I'd be interested in hearing what you think!
no subject
Date: 2003-10-27 06:05 am (UTC)Hm. I'm realizing you might not have meant this posting seriously. The idea of 1/2 the participants in a workshop on love, intimacy, and sexuality being paid for their presumed fulfillment of a traditional gender role boggles my brain. I delight in genderfuck, and actively oppose workshop dogma which presumes anything about males as opposed to females. (These were Tantra and "More" workshops, not HAI stuff).
Hey, I enable people's intimacy, mostly by listening, but that's my choice. If I don't want to, I can choose not to. And way back when I had my invisible wall around me I doubt I enabled anyone.
I have many personal experiences of HAI I'll not go into here. Bottom line is I consider HAI to be good stuff, w/o regard to gender, preference, age, disability, race, mono/poly, and other categories.
no subject
Date: 2003-10-27 05:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-10-27 08:29 am (UTC)your feeling of having no net
Date: 2003-10-27 11:08 am (UTC)I want to be part of your net. I want to hear what you think those issues are, and if I can I want to participate in your exploration of those issues. Love and hugs T
Re: your feeling of having no net
Date: 2003-10-27 09:46 pm (UTC)Re: your feeling of having no net
Date: 2003-10-28 12:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-10-27 11:02 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2003-10-28 12:51 am (UTC)Without anyone there... when you risk more, you'll crash sometimes. Who's there to help you up, in that case?
no subject
Date: 2003-10-28 04:31 am (UTC)You are. And the facilitators, who lead the workshops. And the "team", folks who are volunteering their time to help make a workshop happen. (I've been a part of that team of non-participants in many workshps. After getting so much I wanted to give some back.)
connections you make with other participants
Date: 2003-10-28 12:48 pm (UTC)