Definitions that divide

In my work, but also in my spare time, I find myself in situations that strike a chord with me. They niggle at me. Not always straight away. Sometimes they stay with me for days, coming back to me as I walk, as I do other things, as I think. They are little seeds that keep taking root and lead me to question the way we view ourselves and others.

A while ago, I read a sentence that said, more or less, that each of us has a more masculine side and a more feminine side.
It’s one of those statements you come across quite often. Many find it reassuring; some even consider it a key to understanding people.

I, on the other hand, paused to think.

And I asked myself: have you ever really given this any thought?
What happens if we start looking at the world through this lens?

If a woman is very determined, loves sport, is competitive, and makes decisions with firmness… does that mean she is expressing her ‘masculine side’? Does she become less of a woman?
And if a man is particularly sensitive, warm, emotional, capable of listening and showing his vulnerabilities… does that mean he is less of a man?

The more I think about it, the more I feel that something isn’t quite right.
Because, even when these definitions are presented with the best of intentions, they continue to divide human characteristics into two categories.

On the one hand, the masculine.
On the other, the feminine.

As if courage had a gender.
As if gentleness had another.
As if strength naturally belonged to one group and sensitivity to another.

I believe that this way of describing people does not make us any freer.

Quite the opposite.

I think it ends up creating new stereotypes.
Perhaps more subtle than those of the past, perhaps expressed in different language, but still stereotypes nonetheless. And stereotypes have one distinct characteristic: they oversimplify.

They simplify complexity.
They lead us to believe that reality can be organised into clear-cut categories, when in fact life is made up of nuances, contradictions, changes, and characteristics that coexist within the same human being without any need to be labelled.

When we divide everything into two poles, we inevitably create dichotomies.

Masculine versus feminine.
Rational versus emotional.
Strong versus delicate.

It is a way of interpreting the world that stifles dialogue, because instead of truly getting to know a person, we immediately start to pigeonhole them into a definition.

And I, quite frankly, do not want to do that.
I am who I am.

And that is how I try to view the people who place their trust in me, too.

When someone comes into my practice, I don’t see a woman who is expected to behave in a certain way. I don’t see a man who is expected to react according to a specific pattern.
I see a person.

A person with their own history, their own body, their own fears, their own strengths, their own desires.
And that’s where I start
.
In my approach, I will never split a person in two, nor will I ever speak in terms of stereotypes.

I won’t try to explain who you are through binary categories, because I believe that reducing someone to a supposed masculine or feminine energy means losing sight of what really matters: their uniqueness.

Because every person is far more complex than any definition.