Tyson Yunkaporta: Romance destroys exceptional women
a wild dive into indigenous knowledge systems
You asked for it, I wrangled it.
I did a call out some time back, calling for Wild guest suggestions from you all. A number of you flagged Aboriginal scholar Tyson Yunkaporta, founder of the Indigenous Knowledge Systems Lab at Melbourne’s Deakin University.
I’d come across Tyson in various weird-ass “sensemaking” circles, in which he is often called upon for his ability to talk complexity theories as they emerge from Indigenous systems. Just for some icing and cherry effect, Douglas Rushkoff then also called him out as one of his favourite thinkers in the world when I asked him to list a bunch for us all here.
That was three strikes. I had to act.
For context, Tyson wrote the mind-blowing book Sand Talk. It has a cracking subtitle - “How Indigenous thinking can save the world” - which I think we are all inclined to grasp at, hopefully. Wow, what if the oldest living peoples on the planet, who’ve survived 60,000 years in one of the most hostile places on the planet, had answers and ways that we hadn’t bothered to acknowledge?
So in today’s download on Wild, I talk with Tyson about how these knowledge systems are wonderfully calibrated for resolving the complex global crises we face today. Rather than looking at Indigenous knowledge systems and practices from a Western perspective, Tyson examines the Western world and all its disconnects, force-fit ideologies and cult-like thinking from an Indigenous perspective. It’s a mind-blowing way to pull apart most of the themes we’re all talking about here - AI, conspiracy theories, neobliberalism, wokeness, inequality, loneliness. And in this chat we kind of cover them all. But we do so via the very systems Tyson has studied and has committed to sharing with the world on behalf of others (he doesn’t profess to represent all Indigenous peoples).
Which means… the conversation is not linear and, I think, is quite challenging. As Tyson explains, Western thought has – over centuries – come to reject the Natural Laws of the universe and overlay a linear simplification where we, the individual, sit at the centre of perspective and world view. Indigenous cultures refer to this as a curse, or “emu energy”. It’s narcissim out of check.
Much more to say. Just listen to the episode, yeah?
But either before or after you do, you might like to ponder this wisdom from Tyson, which appears in Sand Talk. It picks up on another ongoing conversation many of us have been having the past few months about modern masculinity. I thought you might have takes on his take:
“And that's how romance works. It exploits the Achilles' heel of exceptional women: their desire to think the best of men and stand by their side. Contrary to popular belief, men are not turned off by powerful women. Rather, they long for them, court them, wine and dine them, and ultimately either ruin them or lock them in their towers. It was the violence of romance that conquered women, more than witch pyres and swords and pillaging. Once trapped, the protection rackets run by their captors kept terrorized females dependent and compliant so as not to disturb the precarious and conditional security they were offered.
Thoughts?
As I wrote this I came across a link to an old Elephant Journal article How Open-Hearted Men can Show Up for Strong, Independent Women. It opens with a provocative premise, written by a man in the first person:
Generation upon generation of men failing to whole-heartedly show up for women—as fathers, brothers, friends, and lovers—has necessitated a breed of “strong, independent women.” These women have developed their own brand of armor out of necessity, as a survival instinct. Men, on the other hand, continue to grow more and more disconnected from their hearts, and are now relying on the heart-strength of their women to maintain relationships.
This acknowledgment of the “strong independent women” (definitely in inverted commas) as a constructed persona that many women of my generation were forced to adopt to compensate for men’s struggles is stunning stuff.
The writer goes onto explain he was a bit of a limited douche until he did the work to become an open-hearted dude. He was then able to enter a new kind of relationship with a fresh kind of woman; but he soon found…the women would flee:
Yet, there inevitably came a time, when that woman found herself stripped bare of all of her armor that kept her alive and safe all these years, and it terrified her.
He concludes that rather than feel it was all for nothing, he now has a role to play in the challenging transition the genders are going through. To hold. To hold.
Nice.
There is so much to say about how these two ideas from different male writers about "strong”, exceptional women intersect. I might leave it to everyone here to chime in.
Although I will throw in this observation: I don’t think I have ever read anything written by a man about women in this way - sensitive to, rather than defensive of, the phenomenon, which is essentially an injury of toxic masculinity (just as the close-hearted experience men feel constricted by is also an injury of the patriarchal status quo). It feels quite alien to be analysed and observed in this way (as opposed to the generic way women are observed and written about in most literature).
Over to you,
Sarah xx
Having just left a ten year relationship and coming to terms with what pushed me to make that decision, this hits a nerve. I feel I can relate to this story, the strong independent woman attracts an intelligent man who values her power, leans on her to establish his own heart connection, but she gets bound up in the vines of love and romance and starts to whither over the years while he thrives. No pity needed, just reflecting. It's a story I've seen play out in many spaces. It's challenging to reflect that I wasn't armoured when I started out in love, and here I am in my thirties, highly wary. I have become her. To strip that back and dearmour again is quite the mission, albeit a worthy one, but it's certainly daunting. I appreciate the compassion shown by the two men you quote here, I'm just struck a bit by the sadness of the situation.
Both Tyson and Jonathan make valuable points. We only have to look at how men have sought to minimise women throughout history, whether it's in institutions such as politics (Julia Gillard's treatment was simply horrible) and the church (don't get me started on the church) and in life in general to validate some of Tyson's perspectives. I'm not convinced all men 'long for powerful women', in fact now I'd suggest many are simply terrified when confronted by one and hence, why we may seek to diminish. Alternatively, we'll adore powerful women but won't want to explore a relationship because we're terrified we'll be diminished. It's all quite fascinating and sometimes we get caught generalising which is very normal for us to do as it gives us some sense of answer that may comfort us.
Thanks again, Sarah for sharing such thought provoking perspectives for us to reflect upon. I do hope that your days re getting a little easier. I am loving seeing how strangers are enveloping you in their love and care as you wander. The boomerang effect of love is one of those natural laws of the universe in my mind ... the universe gives back what we put out into the world and we're seeing through you a wonderful demonstration of it. You give out such love & goodness and now it's being given back.
Go well, dear Sarah. Hugs and continued blessings. xx