The Divine Delusion of Gender

On "Energy" and the TikTokification of Spirituality

“The Birth of Venus” by Sandro Botticelli

In college, I took a lot of courses on gender studies - some of which were great and some of which widely missed the mark. One of the many challenges with teaching gender studies is that research on the topic is constantly expanding. The ways in which our world conceived gender 50 years ago is vastly different than how we viewed it 20 years ago, and even more different than how we view it today. Due to these differing abstract conceptions, varying perspectives of feminism have emerged, many of which overlap and many of which hold stark differences.

One textbook of mine took an attempted apolitical stance by defining these “different types of feminism,” outlining them in tidy boxes as one would a menu of options to review for dinner. For example, the textbook defined “liberal feminism” as concerned with equality between women and men within the laws and regulations of a liberal democracy. This form of feminism isn’t concerned with transforming the systems we have but rather tweaking them ever so slightly to help (some) women have advantages (e.g. affirmative action, Title IX, “empowerment” workshops). On another hand, “radical feminism” is disinterested in working within the current liberal framework as its roots are tangled up with patriarchy. Instead, radical feminists advocate for throwing out the current systems and institutions and transforming them from the bottom up.

One “version” of feminism in my textbook that I often struggled to grasp was “cultural feminism.” Under cultural feminist doctrines, there are essential differences between men and women that must be leaned into by either gender. Men, for instance, are more direct, decisive, and guided by rationality and logic in life. Women, however, are more nurturing, imaginative, and guided by emotion and relationships. Many so-called cultural feminists believe that these more “feminine” traits are superior to “masculine” ones and thus are the ones that should be further adopted by a culture.

The main issue I’ve had with cultural feminist principles is that the source of these “essential” differences between men and women is often obscured. The true source of most differences between men and women is the disparate social conditioning either gender endures. Boys are taught through institutions like media, education, and their families that they are at their most valuable and desirable when they are rational, logical, and withhold emotion. Women, on the other hand, are taught to nurture, forgive, and lean into their emotions.

When social conditioning isn’t brought into the picture, these behavioral differences are often made out to be the result of biology - nature rather than nurture. This phenomenon is commonly known as “biological essentialism,” or a process in which biological influences precede cultural influences and set predetermined limits to the effects of culture. In the context of gender, biological essentialist beliefs often conceive “men” and “women” as vastly different from one another, existing in rigid boxes that cannot be stretched. And when the fluid nature of gender is denied, “innate” attributes are used to justify aggression in men, maltreatment of women, and erasure of non-binary identities.

Among the progressive minds of the Gen Z generation, I would assume that biological essentialism - and its related gender binary - is an idea that many would outright reject. I would assume many would believe that having a rigid gender binary is to blame for cisheteronormativity and harmful gender roles. And yet, many young people I’ve spoken to - both on- and offline - who promote progressive ideals are buying into biological essentialist doctrines, perhaps without even realizing it.

Just as YouTube was in the 2010s, TikTok has become a steadfast place for young people to receive and give advice to other young people. Much of the advice-giving that takes place among young women lands in the lifestyle and relationship genre. Girls and women stare into their phone cameras, voices elevated and hands gesturing and waving with the fervor of a passionate preacher. I draw the comparison to a religious leader because some of the guidance that’s given often dips into quasi-spiritual waters. “Divine” waters, even.

Across social media, but on TikTok in particular, a discourse has sprouted that i-D Magazine is calling “spiritual misogyny.” Women on TikTok, like the creator @thecarolinalifestyle, have posted videos explaining how to tap into one’s “divine masculine” and “divine feminine” energy. According to @thecarolinalifestyle, the divine masculine involves high intensity workouts, discipline, and “having a sense of direction in life.” The divine feminine involves “surrendering control,” “dancing freely,” and “resting your body.” Within this discourse, viewers are often encouraged to step into their respective gendered energy or seek balance between the two to fully “heal” themselves. As of June 2022 when this i-D article was written, #DivineFeminine had about 1.6 billion views on TikTok alone.

As I mentioned before, I’m surprised that this type of rhetoric has been co-opted in this hyper-gendered way by so many creators who may likely denounce misogyny in other domains. In i-D, writer Laura Pitcher even draws comparisons to the types of language being used within this discourse with “high value man” language spewed by violent misogynists like Andrew Tate. In tandem with the divine feminine and divine masculine language are different types of femininity one can tap into, with confidence and high standards being associated with “dark femininity” and forgiveness and acceptance being associated with “light femininity.” What all of this type of language has in common is a desire to tap into one’s full potential by leaning into arbitrary stereotypes about gender.

What’s apparent from this internet trend - along with the copious aesthetic labels (cottagecore, dark academia, etc.) people slap onto themselves - is that young people are hungry for some kind of order to help them sort out their identities, emotions, and individual experiences. When we feel fed up with the world and just want to lay down and rest, being able to point at it as leaning into our “divine feminine” energy rather than a direct outcome of physical and mental exhaustion gives us an ounce of relief and, perhaps, agency. If I don’t feel like I have a purpose in my life, don’t desire to find one, and simply live to rest my body and surrender my control - it’s justifiable because I am divinely feminine. Easy as that.

I’ve always been wary of “health” and “wellness” advice given on TikTok as it’s often administered based on a single creator’s experience rather than being backed by science and research. Interestingly though, it seems like many are drawn to the app because of all they feel like they learn from it. While I’m sure there are domains that are helpful to discuss through the lens of a single creator’s experience, when the basis of our learning is a social media app that funnels people into algorithms based on their interests and identities, that learning is going to be rather skewed.

The true message that appears to be at the crux of this online discussion is a desire for balance. A desire to lean into the polarity that lives within all of us - a polarity that is completely unrelated to gender. Creators keep stressing the need for both discipline and focus, but also rest and reflection. In several videos, I even see comparisons being drawn between the “divine feminine” and “divine masculine” and yin and yang, a Chinese symbol describing opposite but interconnected forces.

I too agree that balance is needed in life and messages promoting balance are useful, particularly in a world that encourages women to be constantly optimizing towards a nonexistent faultless self. However, even in conversations about balance, the popular narrative cannot help but subscribe to stringent binaries. Human minds find concepts easiest to understand when they’re contrarian. But our world is constantly contradicting itself. Things can mean multiple things at once. People can hold seemingly opposite views but also hold more common ground than they do difference. Nothing about life - about gender, feminism, life balance, and anything else - is as organized as it seems or as many wish it to be.

Acute categorization eliminates a lot of the critical thinking needed to truly discover and transform ourselves. If things just are the way they are because they’re naturally that way - divinely that way - it can be a lot easier to accept. Tidy boxes containing the answers.

Accepting the truth and embracing that life contains true complexity is challenging. And much more honest. Resting when we desire to rest, nurturing those we love but also seeking a life purpose and energizing our bodies and minds, not because we identify a certain way, but because we deserve to step into the wholeness of the human experience. If we can learn to live harmoniously with life’s complications, ebbing and flowing with what we feel and with what life throws our way, perhaps we can truly be healed.