I made a post a few weeks ago talking about the Son of Man archetype, which seemed to get some resistance for good reason. Especially recently, we have been hearing a lot of talk about how gender is a social construct and our outdated understandings contribute to systematic sexism in our world today. My post seemed to hint toward a solid boundary separating them, but I promised I would do a post to clarify my conceptualization in the hope that it will appeal to more people.

In that post, I talked a bit about the pursuit of truth. Truth is a virtue that has stood the test of time, and its ultimate pursuit is commonly associated with religious institutions and universities. Throughout history it was often a privilege solely given to the upper class, and it contains a natural hierarchy in its structure (teachers and students).

The main reason I associated the pursuit of truth with masculinity is because it requires a concrete direction. In essence, this is associated with a desire for purpose and progress that must cut out distractions leading in other directions. Perception must be sharpened to pierce through layers of lies and ambiguity in order to build a bulletproof structure of truth. A lot of times it is painful because beautiful lies can and must be destroyed in the process. It is rigid and can be authoritarian, which conventionally is associated with strict fathers. That definitely varies across cultures, but the archetype of a tough, direct person is often seen as masculine.

With that image in mind, the Daughter of Woman archetype is entirely different. I associate it with love, which doesn’t really have a direction per se. It is more like a reservoir of positive energy that is contagious and can spread to everybody within a given vicinity. This interconnectedness is extremely complex, and words are often not needed to convey the emotions experienced. If anything, words can’t be used because emotions tend to be extremely ambiguous. Instead of building anything up, it tends to melt barriers within a safe space created between people and leads to healing. The archetype of a soft, comforting person is often seen as feminine.

Love is extremely difficult to pin down, and I tried to conceptualize it in my old book review post All About Love by Bell Hooks. My understanding has definitely evolved since then, but if anything I am just trying to put it into a box to explain a truth. The best way to fully understand love is simply to experience it. It is, I think, the most important component to willingly breaking down defensive walls and allowing the natural healing process to take over. It is the best way to connect with people, and is directly related to demonstrating empathy. You could even argue they are inseparable.

With all that in mind, it is clear that love is not only a feminine thing and truth is not only a masculine thing. In our culture that is how it is commonly portrayed and it makes a lot of sense to me. Who knows how deep biologically or socially these archetypes go and in what forms they are expressed, but I fully agree with the idea that everybody has aspects of both within them.

This is my current understanding, and although it is definitely incomplete I want to put it out there to see if it makes sense. Please provide me with feedback if you would like! If anything, it is essential that I gain some feedback because I just started an online PhD program in Clinical psychology at Saybrook University. I will be learning a lot more over the next 5 or so years, and I will be adjusting my “truth structure” constantly. I can’t wait!