.png)
The confusion between the words masculine and feminine with essentialism often arises because these terms have historically been used to describe qualities or roles that are assigned to men and women based on traditional, cultural, and biological stereotypes. I think about my grandmothers and how they not only couldn’t afford to pursue higher education, but were also actively discouraged from developing any thinking or discourse skills at all, simply because of the bodies they were born into. It breaks my heart to think about how their potential was stifled, how their voices were silenced by a world that didn’t value their thoughts or ideas—just because they were women.
Essentialism is the belief that certain traits or behaviours are inherently tied to one's biological sex or gender, suggesting that men and women are naturally predisposed to behave in specific ways because of their essential nature. This view often reduces complex human experiences to rigid, binary categories, which is problematic because it doesn't account for the diversity of individual identities and experiences. I find essentialism infuriating because, in the case of my grandmothers, they only knew a world that oppressed their ability to use their thinking functions—abilities that could have helped them improve their lives. They were denied the opportunity to make discerning decisions and express their opinions on important matters, which limited their potential and agency.
When people use the terms masculine and feminine in an essentialist way, they often assume that these qualities are fixed and universally tied to gender. For example, they might believe that women are inherently nurturing, intuitive, and emotional (feminine traits), while men are inherently strong, rational, and assertive (masculine traits). This essentialist view reinforces stereotypes that limit personal expression and individual choice, implying that if you’re biologically male, you must exhibit masculine traits, and if you’re biologically female, you must exhibit feminine traits.
I cringe when I see people getting their advice from writers like David Deida, who make it sound like there’s a specific way women should behave to get what they want from men, instead of simply saying what they want directly. He frames the feminine as something that must cater to the masculine or exist in a way that is secondary to the masculine energy—ew. This can perpetuate the notion that women need to suppress their own desires, voice, and agency in order to appeal to men or maintain romantic relationships.
However, the terms masculine and feminine in modern discourse, especially in fields like psychology, philosophy, and gender studies, are often understood as energies, qualities, or archetypes that exist within all people, regardless of gender. Thankfully, in the realm of feminine psychology, we have powerful like Marion Woodman, Clarissa Pinkola Estés, Jean Shinoda Bolen, Betty Friedan and Carol Gilligan challenging traditional psychological models, exploring the depth of feminine energy, and advocating for a fuller understanding of women’s emotional, spiritual, and psychological experiences.
Again, these energies are not inherently linked to biological sex or gender identity; instead, they represent a spectrum of traits that can manifest in different ways across individuals. For example, masculine traits might include assertiveness, logic, or independence, but these can be embodied by both men and women. Similarly, feminine traits like sensitivity, empathy, or receptivity can be exhibited by anyone, regardless of gender.
The problem with essentialism is that it limits the potential for individuals to express themselves fully and authentically. By reducing masculinity and femininity to rigid, gendered categories, essentialism overlooks the complexity and fluidity of human identity. It fails to recognize that everyone has a unique combination of traits—some considered traditionally masculine, some feminine—that they embody in their own way. When we move beyond essentialism, we open up space for a more inclusive, expansive understanding of these terms. The masculine and feminine are no longer confined to binary gender roles but become qualities that anyone can cultivate and express, regardless of their sex or gender identity. Marion Woodman, believed that both masculine and feminine energies are present within everyone and must be balanced and integrated for personal and collective healing.
So, in essence, the confusion between masculine and feminine and essentialism stems from an outdated, limited view of gender, one that enforces stereotypes and fails to appreciate the full complexity of human expression. Moving away from essentialism allows us to embrace a more holistic and flexible understanding of these energies, recognizing that they are fluid, interconnected, and not bound by gender or biological sex.
When I created a podcast exploring "what is the feminine," I was asking women about their personal experiences with these qualities—what feminine energy meant to them and how it showed up in their lives. It was an invitation to explore the richness of feminine energy beyond the old, limiting definitions that often tied it solely to being passive, weak, or dependent. I was searching for an authentic expression of the feminine in a modern, empowered sense. The podcast, in its essence, was an invitation to transcend the old, limiting ideas about what it means to be feminine, and instead, to explore how the feminine can manifest in unique and empowering ways, particularly in relation to the masculine. And it’s this deeper, more expansive understanding of the feminine that requires a deprogramming of old beliefs about gender and identity, which for some therapists, was still a new and unfamiliar territory.
Unfortunately, people who have yet to deprogram the traditional, rigid ideas of masculinity and femininity—might operate from a perspective that equates femininity with certain roles or traits that were stereotypically associated with women. To them, hearing the term Feminine might hold societal expectations, reducing women to certain "soft" qualities and not allowing space for the full, multifaceted nature of who women could be. I am so glad I had the chance to interview so many powerful women on the Earth Priestess Podcast, opening up space for qualities like intuition, creativity, and receptivity, but also about power, agency, and boldness, without being confined by society’s limited expectations. When we embrace the feminine in this deeper way, we free ourselves from essentialism and the trap of defining women by any one set of qualities or behaviours.
I'm pausing now after the latest and final episode (for now) of The Earth Priestess Podcast. This episode with Spring Washam will be coming soon!
After that, I will be starting a new podcast called Wise Body Sex Therapy which will focus on the integration of body, mind, and spirit in relation to sexuality, healing, and personal empowerment. It carries on the idea that the body holds wisdom—particularly the subconscious and emotional experiences that impact our sexual health, desire, and intimacy. It will emphasize the importance of reconnecting with the body, listening to its sensations, and using this awareness to deepen sexual expression, healing, and connection.
Comentários