Burnley Relief, 19th-18th Century BCE, British Museum.
This is an edited excerpt from my book Don’t Take It Lying Down: Life According to the Goddess. This book is based on my PhD thesis in which I explored women’s reproductive autonomy and a mindbody approach to birth control.
The word “aesthetics” comes from the Greek for perceiving. In the English language, we tend to use the word to refer to an appreciation of beautiful things. I use the word here to explore how women feel about birth control. Does it seem beautiful to them? Does it have a quality that brings pleasure to the senses or the mind?
On the contrary.
It has been suggested by one Jungian analyst that
. . . to a great many women contraceptives, though accepted intellectually, are still unaesthetic, and to a deep basic feminine morality they are wholly unacceptable.[i]
What is this deep, basic feminine morality?
Basic feminine morality is linked to the rhythms and cycles of Nature, to the experience of change and renewal that is so clearly reflected in a woman’s menstrual cycle. It involves an appreciation of time:
The time it takes for one whole cycle of the moon (remember that women were the first time keepers, with sticks or stone marked for the phases of the moon and the menstrual cycle).
The time it takes to grow a baby from the first spark of life to the fully formed child ready to be born.
The time it takes to give birth.
The time it takes for a child to grow into an adult.
Feminine morality is about working with Nature, with the natural rhythms and cycles.
It could be argued that birth control has to work against Nature; in order to prevent pregnancy, the natural process of conception has to be interrupted. Of course, that is completely true. There is, however, a vast difference between using a synthetic hormone that acts on the mindbody system, and engaging a process that works with the mindbody system to bring about a shift that is ecologically sound. When something is ecologically sound, all the parts of the system are in agreement; any changes that occur are harmonious throughout the whole system, and nothing is being forced or suppressed in an absolute way.
When we use a synthetic hormone or chemical that is designed for a specific purpose, we are introducing something into our system that cannot be used by the body in any other way. On the other hand, the naturally occurring neuro-chemicals and hormones in the body can be changed and redirected by the mindbody system to maintain balance and harmony. One of the serious consequences of the widespread use of oestrogen-based oral contraceptives is that the oestrogen/progesterone balance in women’s bodies has been undermined.[ii] The synthetic hormones take up space that would otherwise be used by the naturally occurring body hormones. When this happens, the natural levels fall, and the body’s ability to continue producing the natural hormones is affected.
Even when a woman does not have this biochemical knowledge, she may still find the contraceptive Pill “unaesthetic”.
Our deep basic feminine morality is supported by a reverence for the life-giving power of the feminine. When we reconnect with ancient principles that underlie reproduction, we rediscover the forgotten mysteries of women’s ways that offer true reproductive autonomy. We reclaim power, control and choice.
Mythology and anthropology show that the most important aspects of birth control involve issues of power and control, as well as prevailing beliefs about how reproduction works. Overwhelmingly, I have found that women today express strong concerns about power and control in their experience of contraception.
. . .either the Pill was not helping or it was one more thing where I felt controlled.
This experience of feeling controlled can arise in relation to all aspects of fertility. In my home state of Victoria, Australia, for example, the statistics for caesarian birth indicate a disturbing degree of taking over by the medical profession (23% in 1999-2000 compared with the WHO recommended rate of 12%).[iii]
Women’s experiences of powerlessness and lack of control in fertility management indicate a deep basic feminine morality that is disrupted by modern contraceptive methods. When I was studying philosophy early in my undergraduate years I was impressed by a definition of morality as choice, based on the Latin derivation of the word. If morality is fundamentally about choice, then our deep feminine morality will be offended by experiences of powerlessness and lack of choice.
When women are dissatisfied with their contraceptive choices, what are they really saying?
I hear them saying that while the birth control methods offered by medical science may have offered some control of the rhythms and cycles of fertility, they have not offered a subjective, personal experience of empowerment or control. This makes sense in the light of the historical and anthropological material that shows how women’s experience of fertility management has been affected for many generations by political and religious issues of power and control. The takeover of women’s mysteries by patriarchal religions, scientific principles and technological solutions has demoralised us.
There is little doubt that there is still discomfort and shame attached to the functions of fertility, despite liberation in other areas of a woman’s life. We live in a time when we are relatively well educated and appear to be free to choose in many areas of our lives, but many women still report an experience of ignorance, powerlessness, and lack of choice around reproduction and birth control. Whether or not we are having children, when we choose to have them, and how many we have, are topics of intense debate and opinion.
Anthropology shows us that all people are educated and conditioned to adopt the values, beliefs and practices of their culture. People become bound by and to whatever belief systems contribute to the cultural consensus, limiting reality to a particular time and space[iv]. So strong is the prevailing belief system in any culture that those who do something that differs from current consensus reality are described as being resistant to enculturation.
Resistance to enculturation is a term borrowed from Abraham Maslow, a psychologist who studied the human personality.[v]
Maslow is most well known for his investigation of the characteristics of self-actualisation, the optimal functioning of the healthy personality. In relation to the practice of reproductive autonomy, there are two characteristics of self-actualisation that are of interest: autonomy and resistance to enculturation.
Autonomy is described as a relative independence from the physical and social environment, with a reliance on one’s own latent resources.
Resistance to enculturation involves a particular detachment from the culture in which a person lives[vi], and suggests adherence to one’s own rules rather than the rules of society.
Maslow’s work identifies some basic characteristics of autonomy in reproduction and in life. Women who develop autonomy and resistance to enculturation are responding and behaving in a way that differs from the prevailing cultural perception of reality. They are seeing with other eyes and hearing with other ears.
[i] I C de Castillejo, 1973, Knowing Woman, New York, G P Putnam’s Sons, p. 151.
[ii] L. Kenton, 1995. Passage to Power: Natural Menopause Revolution. London, Random House, p. 5.
[iii] M Riley & J. Halliday, 2001. Births in Victoria 1999-2000. Victoria, Australia, Public Health Department of Human Services, p. 40.
[iv] M Eliade, 1954, The Myth of the Eternal Return, Princeton, NJ, Princeton University Press.
See also CD Laughlin, J McManus, & EG d”Aquili, 1990, Brain, Symbol & Experience: Toward a Neurophenomenology of Human Consciousness, Boston, MA, New Science Library.
[v] AH Maslow, 1954, Motivation and Personality, New York, Harper & Row.
[vi] ibid. p. 224.