“At the beginning of a new millennium, we are participating in the birth of a new evolutionary era, one with radically different aims and values from those which dominated the patriarchal era. Mythologically speaking, this new era invites the marriage of lunar and solar consciousness and the birth of the ‘child’ of a new kind of consciousness arising in the soul of humanity that would be the fruit of this union and the true ‘saviour’ of our species. . . It is a tremendously exciting, challenging and creative time to be alive.” ~Jungian Analyst Anne Baring, “Awakening to the Feminine.”
An obsession with the solar archetype during the patriarchal era has conditioned us to minimize lunar consciousness. We think the resulting conflicts are inevitable. They’re not. It is possible to live with inner and outer harmony, but we just haven’t evolved that far yet. The multiple wars and societal chaos characterizing the 20th century are finally awakening us to this imbalance and forcing us to take the lunar archetype seriously.
“If we can abandon our addiction to weapons and war, directing the trillions saved on feeding, educating and caring for the children of the world, the result will be an infinitely better world and the possibility of our own survival as a species. We need to challenge the arcane warrior ethos of governments . . .” Baring, “Awakening to the Feminine.”
As Baring notes, feeding, educating and caring for the children of the world is a primary aim of lunar consciousness, and it is crucial that our governments act on this. The fact that Hillary Clinton has devoted her life to this cause is a major reason I say her feminine archetype is well activated. Consider these facts:
Hillary’s Record
Instead of signing on to a prestigious law firm after graduating from Yale, she went to work for the Children’s Defense Fund—focusing her career on the fundamental need for quality public education for every American child. She also worked with teenagers in adult prisons in South Carolina and families with children with disabilities in Massachusetts.
When she was appointed to the Arkansas Education Standards Committee, she investigated public schools throughout the state, listening to parents and teachers and working with a team of educators to create policy that would better prepare Arkansas students for a 21st-century economy. Before that she had already co-founded the Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families, which would later make huge strides in standing up for children in the welfare system.
In 1995, as first lady, she boldly declared “women’s rights are human rights” at a U.N. conference in Beijing. This was much more controversial than it sounds today. Many in the U.S. government didn’t want her to go to Beijing. Others wanted her to pick a less “polarizing” topic. I think it’s a sign of her sincere passion for this cause that she stood up for her beliefs and spoke out about human rights abuses at a time when this was not a popular stance. A Huffington Post article says,
“Globally, no candidate has done more for women’s rights than Secretary Clinton. In her time as Secretary of State, she appointed the first-ever Ambassador-at-Large for Global Women’s Issues at the State Department; oversaw the creation of the U.S. National Action Plan on Women, Peace, and Security; and introduced the Global Health Initiative (GHI), investing $63 billion to help partner countries provide robust maternal and infant health services. Secretary Clinton has worked tirelessly to elevate women’s rights as the key towards economic prosperity and global stability. Her public and private initiatives have appropriated millions of dollars towards providing secondary education to young girls around the world, and tackling the obstacles that face at-risk youths.”
In 1997 she worked with Republicans and Democrats to secure health care for millions of American kids. As first lady she fought to help pass health care reform. When that failed, she worked with Republicans and Democrats to help create the Children’s Health Insurance Program. CHIP cut the uninsured rate of American children by half, and today it provides health care to more than 8 million kids.
As U.S. senator from New York, she supported comprehensive immigration reform legislation, co-sponsored the DREAM Act three times, and worked to expand health care access for low-income immigrant mothers and children.
Hillary’s Character
The presidential candidates are running for the highest office in a system dominated by solar consciousness and numerous examples of corruption. Ideally, we’d prefer the winner to be above ethical compromises, but as Dr. Carl Jung asserts, it is humanly impossible for any individual to exist without a moral shadow. We all have one. It therefore seems more fruitful to compare Clinton’s and Trump’s observable shadows than to hold one of them to an unattainable standard while dismissing the character flaws of the other. I’m not advocating lowering the bar. I’m facing the realities of human nature in a flawed system and only asking that we view the facts objectively and judge accordingly.
Here are the facts as cited by the Washington Post Fact-Checker site. In comparing claims made by both candidates, out of 52 rated claims made by Trump, 63 percent were rated false. Out of 36 rated claims made by Clinton, 14 percent were rated false.
Hillary’s Personality and Likability
“Awakening to the Feminine means becoming protective of the whole of creation; dying to all the divisive ways of looking at life and each other; being born into an utterly different vision of reality.” ~Baring, “Awakening to the Feminine.”
Some perceive Hillary to be harsh and overly aggressive but people who know her disagree. I attribute this to three factors. First, we are unconsciously influenced by longstanding stereotypes about what women’s roles and behavior ‘should’ look like. Second, our history and art have trained us to empathize with white men and go easier on their flaws. Third, we have few cultural models of strong, complex, confident, female leadership.
As Hillary explains in a recent post for Humans Of New York,
“It’s hard work to present yourself in the best possible way. You have to communicate in a way that people say: ‘OK, I get her.’ And that can be more difficult for a woman. Because who are your models? If you want to run for the Senate, or run for the Presidency, most of your role models are going to be men. And what works for them won’t work for you. Women are seen through a different lens.”
22 Responses
Thanks Jeanie. I would have liked to have heard the debate but at 3.00 a.m. our side this was not possible. I know that it will be re-broadcast so I’ll listen to it then. Excerpts from it will also be available. Just this morning I took my car in for a service and was given a lift home by the car dealer by a man called Joseph who lives in a township. A strong ANC supporter (African National Congress, Nelson Mandela was elected pres in 1994 under that banner), Joseph was ranting about how far the ANC has fallen and how it simply does not deliver on its promises and how the ANC feathers its own nest ad nauseam.
Hillary has delivered – this is what matters. She stands up for what she believes in. I fully agree re the points you make under Hillary’s personality and likability – that collectively we have an ‘idea’ of how a woman ‘should’ be (ugh I hate that word: should); historically men – solar consciousness have been the leaders (where has that got us?); and our cultural models of female leadership are few and far in between.
May lunar consciousness come to the fore and bring to the world what it so desperately needs .. an integration of the masculine and feminine energies for the benefit of all. No more killing, no more desecration of Mother Nature, no more bridges that exclude each from the other. May bridges be used for the purpose they were designed –
Thank you, Susan. I did watch the debate despite strong feelings of anxiety before, during and after. This morning I was heartened to read a portion of a Facebook interview in which author and journalist Pythia Peay interviewed Jungian analyst Murray Stein about this issue of anxiety during election time:
PP: [E]very four years American voters endure a period of anxiety as they wait and see who their next president will be. No one ever talks about this, but is this chaos that we go through just part of the territory that comes with participating in a democracy?
MS: Absolutely. A person living in ancient Egypt wouldn’t have had to endure these seasons of anxiety around election time, since the pharaoh decided everything for them. So it does call for emotionally mature people to tolerate the uncertainties of an election.
Your driver Joseph’s rant and the many rants we’re seeing on social media are examples of how this anxiety can effect people’s behavior. It contains a great deal of emotional maturity to contain our anxiety, and in last night’s debate Hillary succeeded magnificently. I see this as another example of her healthy leadership and diplomacy skills. 🙂
I saw Pythia Peay’s FB post earlier but didn’t have time to respond which I now have – Joseph’s rant was excellent in that he was saying no more to our rulers – no more, in spite of his long allegiance to the ANC. Loyalty to outmoded allegiances must give way when something more hopeful emerges .. I think this is happening 🙂
An excellent point, Susan. There comes a point when the ego is strong and consciousness enough to leave outmoded loyalties behind. This doesn’t happen without strong emotion. In fact, if it’s only a mental idea unaccompanied by emotion, it has little value and no power to make any lasting change.
It is a very good thing that we are all talking about this sort of thing now. Sadly, it is going to be a slow slog to have it permeate all of the knuckleheads of the world, but understanding the problem is a very good place to begin.
I’m excited that we’re talking about this now too. It’s exceedingly difficult for so many people, males and females alike, to give up their loyalties to our patriarchal system, even when it has so obviously not served them well. The anger has to come out, and we have to recognize it for what it is. If nobody’s angry about injustice it simply means they’re too unconscious or afraid of their pain to see it. That’s what the rage of the bra-burning “libbers” was all about in the early stages of feminism. Seeing and owning our pain about being mistreated and disrespected had to happen before we could find ways to come to terms with it and work for positive change. The only reason I can talk and write about these things in a reasonably balanced way now is because over the years my anger has gradually been replaced by a measure of compassion and forgiveness. As you know so well, this is how individuals and societies grow healthier. The fact that we’re talking about this now is a sure sign that we’re beginning to see ourselves and our world a little more clearly.
Hi Jean,
Excellent post! You have a gift for highlighting the key elements. It sure looks to me like Hillary will be way out in front from here forward. Now we can get back to work on the process of integrating our own diverse elements. Thanks again for all your work.
Dick Jungster
Thank you, Dick. Yes, indeed, back to work on the heart of societal problems: the unconscious, unintegrated selves of the individuals who live in it!! 🙂
In my opinion she is the worlds worst role model for women.
>
Hi Anne. Thank you for stopping by. I’m grateful for venues like this in which we can express our honest differences without fear of reprisal. It hasn’t always been so—especially for women.
Reblogged this on lampmagician.
Thank you very much. 🙂
I really appreciate this post (and part one). While I disagree with your conclusion that she is not “overly aggressive” — because I perceive that she is — I concur that her lifetime record also shows strong commitment to children, minorities, and others in need, i.e. her social values are liberal as well as global. I do feel and think that she is a good choice, though I don’t see her as being as balanced as you do.
Thank you for this balanced response, Darla. And so it goes…. There would be no debates, problems, creativity or growth in us if our minds only had one way to perceiving ourselves, others, and the world. If that were the case we’d be nothing more than unconscious animals following our instincts without considering the consequences. The best one can hope for is for each of us to be consciously aware of our own perceptions—what they are, why we have them, and how they influence us—while accepting that others may be very different; then tolerating the tension of disagreeing with them without having to reject, fear or despise them. To me, your ability to remain objective about Hillary’s qualifications without allowing your personal feelings to cloud your judgment is a sign of emotional maturity. Would that more of us were like that! 🙂
Hi Jean,
This is a bit “off-topic” from what is being discussed, but I thought that this is a very well written piece about Jung’s thoughts on aging, a favorite topic of mine. I have noticed that my political views have changed along with my age and Jungian perspective.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kathy-gottberg/carl-jung-aging_b_8173372.html
Dick Jungster
Hi Dick,
Thanks for the link. It’s a wonderful article and I highly recommend it. The older I get, the more solitude and silence I need, and I’m much more selective about how I spend my time. I’m so grateful for having discovered Jung’s wisdom. I can’t even begin to count the ways it’s enhanced my life. With appreciation, Jeanie
Thank you for this powerful piece. Yes, Hillary Clinton isn’t perfect. Not the perfect mother, the perfect woman, the perfect politician, the perfect secretary of state, the perfect anything. Why should she have to be? What other candidates are without flaws? I’m weary with what is demanded of a woman candidate, especially when compared to her impossibly flawed opponent. I’m weary reading that Trump will now drag her through the gutter (again) about things her husband did. Ah, those imperfections as a wife.
Thanks again for Part II. I’m proud of you for writing this, Jeanie. I know it drags you closer to an ugly passionate political debate that causes anxiety in many of us. What an interesting quote from Murray Stein.
I’ll end with an observation that a certain male candidate is hardly an archetype of Kingly Solar Light. He chooses to define himself as a Patriarchal Nightmare and Solar Shadow. That isn’t Hillary Clinton’s fault!
The good news is that Marie Louise Von Franz claims in the Individuation section of Man and His Symbols that the Collective Unconscious doesn’t give two hoots about all of the noisy propaganda, and will decide for its own purposes. I think so too! Keep the faith and vote!
You can count on me on voting day. I’m still working on my Bernie-or-nobody son who lives in NC. I haven’t brought it up for a while, but in NC every vote matters. He’s probably figured that out by now.
Let’s hope so! 🙂
I agree with you and Marie. But that doesn’t stop me from worrying and caring. And especially from voting!!
Thanks, Elaine. Well said. Yes, he is a Solar Shadow and it’s certainly not her fault. They both, as well as the rest of us who live here, are products of the society that shaped us. Right or wrong, good or bad, the best we can do is try to know ourselves and our own flaws so we don’t project them onto others, thereby perpetuating our dysfunctional aspects and tainting our culture with them.