• home
• about
• new
• essays
• AI
• book

Frank Visser, graduated as a psychologist of culture and religion, founded IntegralWorld in 1997. He worked as production manager for various publishing houses and as service manager for various internet companies and lives in Amsterdam. Books: Ken Wilber: Thought as Passion (SUNY, 2003), and The Corona Conspiracy: Combatting Disinformation about the Coronavirus (Kindle, 2020).

Feminism, Masculinism and the Question of Gender

And What Happened to Volume 2 of the Kosmos Trilogy?

Frank Visser / ChatGPT

• Please make a list all schools of academic feminist theory.[1]
• What do all these different feminist schools have in common?
• Which theoretical or ideological approaches oppose feminism today?
• How do these movements interact and where do they have the most influence today?
• So does that qualify as a kind of "masculinism"?
• How has Ken Wilber covered the field of feminist theory?
• Feminist scholar Joyce Nielsen once critiqued Wilber's quip "all these schools agree on is that females exist."[2]
• Curiously, Wilber's vol. 2 of his Kosmos trilogy "Sex, God and Gender" never got published.
• In his early work "Up from Eden" he took a detailed look at the matriarchy and patriarchy, and the downsides of both.
• How has Wilber's theory evolved since Up from Eden?
• Currently, the question “is sex binary?” is hotly debated, with evolutionary biologists joining reactionary conservatists against “woke” culture.

Please make a list all schools of academic feminist theory.

Feminist theory is a broad and diverse field with multiple schools of thought, each offering distinct perspectives on gender, power, and society. Below is a list of the major schools of feminist theory:

1. Liberal Feminism

Focuses on achieving gender equality through legal and political reform.

Emphasizes equal rights, education, and workplace opportunities.

Key figures: Mary Wollstonecraft, John Stuart Mill, Betty Friedan.

2. Radical Feminism

Argues that patriarchy is deeply embedded in society and must be dismantled.

Focuses on issues like reproductive rights, sexual violence, and systemic oppression.

Key figures: Andrea Dworkin, Catharine MacKinnon, Shulamith Firestone.

3. Marxist Feminism

Examines how capitalism exploits women, particularly through unpaid labor and wage gaps.

Advocates for socialist structures to achieve gender equality.

Key figures: Friedrich Engels (influential), Silvia Federici, Alexandra Kollontai.

4. Socialist Feminism

Combines Marxist and radical feminist perspectives.

Views oppression as stemming from both capitalism and patriarchy.

Advocates for structural changes in both economic and gender relations.

Key figures: Heidi Hartmann, Juliet Mitchell.

5. Cultural Feminism

Emphasizes differences between men and women, valuing women's experiences and traits.

Advocates for the celebration of femininity and women-centered spaces.

Key figures: Carol Gilligan, Mary Daly.

6. Ecofeminism

Connects the oppression of women with the exploitation of nature.

Criticizes patriarchal structures for environmental destruction and gender inequality.

Key figures: Vandana Shiva, Françoise d'Eaubonne.

7. Intersectional Feminism

Highlights how race, class, sexuality, and other factors intersect with gender oppression.

Argues that feminism must address multiple, overlapping systems of discrimination.

Key figures: Kimberlé Crenshaw, bell hooks.

8. Postmodern and Poststructuralist Feminism

Challenges fixed gender categories and questions the idea of a singular female experience.

Influenced by thinkers like Michel Foucault and Jacques Derrida.

Key figures: Judith Butler, Donna Haraway, Luce Irigaray.

9. Black Feminism & Womanism

Focuses on the unique experiences of Black women, critiquing mainstream feminism for ignoring race.

Womanism, coined by Alice Walker, expands feminism to include family and community concerns.

Key figures: Sojourner Truth, Audre Lorde, Alice Walker, Angela Davis.

10. Indigenous Feminism

Centers Indigenous women's experiences and critiques both patriarchy and colonialism.

Advocates for sovereignty, environmental justice, and decolonization.

Key figures: Winona LaDuke, Paula Gunn Allen.

11. Queer Feminism

Challenges heteronormativity and binary understandings of gender.

Advocates for the rights of LGBTQ+ individuals within feminism.

Key figures: Judith Butler, Monique Wittig.

12. Materialist Feminism

A branch of Marxist feminism that examines how material conditions shape gender oppression.

Focuses on social reproduction, labor, and capitalist structures.

Key figures: Christine Delphy, Lise Vogel.

13. Cyberfeminism

Examines gender and technology, particularly in digital spaces.

Explores the potential of the internet to challenge patriarchal structures.

Key figures: Donna Haraway, Sadie Plant.

14. Transfeminism

Advocates for the rights and inclusion of transgender people in feminist discourse.

Challenges traditional gender categories and essentialism.

Key figures: Emi Koyama, Julia Serano.

15. Islamic Feminism

Argues for gender equality within an Islamic framework.

Challenges patriarchal interpretations of religious texts.

Key figures: Amina Wadud, Fatema Mernissi.

What do all these different feminist schools have in common?

Despite their differences, all schools of feminist theory share several core principles and goals. Here's what unites them:

1. Gender Equality

All feminist theories seek to challenge and change societal structures that create and reinforce gender inequality.

2. Critique of Patriarchy

They all recognize that patriarchy—systems of male dominance—plays a central role in shaping power dynamics and oppressing women and other marginalized genders.

3. Social Justice

Feminist theories advocate for a more just society, whether through legal reforms, economic restructuring, cultural shifts, or intersectional activism.

4. Focus on Women's Experiences

Regardless of approach, each feminist school centers the lived experiences of women and gender-oppressed groups, even if they define "womanhood" differently.

5. Opposition to Sexism and Gender Norms

All feminisms challenge harmful stereotypes, restrictive gender roles, and discrimination based on sex, gender, or sexuality.

6. Structural Analysis of Power

While they differ in their explanations, all feminist theories analyze how power operates in society, particularly in relation to gender.

7. Advocacy for Change

Whether through reform, revolution, or cultural transformation, every feminist school seeks to improve the conditions of women and marginalized people.

8. Intersection with Other Social Issues

Many feminist theories acknowledge that gender oppression intersects with other forms of inequality, such as classism, racism, colonialism, and ableism.

While they may disagree on strategies, priorities, and theoretical foundations, these commonalities create the broader feminist movement.

Which theoretical or ideological approaches oppose feminism today?

Several approaches and ideological movements oppose feminism today, either partially or entirely. These range from outright rejection of feminist principles to critiques of specific aspects of feminist theory. Here are the main categories:

1. Anti-Feminism

Rejects feminism as a whole, arguing that gender equality has already been achieved or that feminism harms society.

Common claims: Feminism is unnecessary, promotes female supremacy, or victimizes men.

Found in conservative, religious, and some libertarian circles.

2. Men's Rights Activism (MRA)

Focuses on issues affecting men, often blaming feminism for problems like custoday laws, false accusations, and mental health neglect.

Some MRAs seek gender equality, while others promote an anti-feminist agenda.

Key figures: Warren Farrell (earlier moderate MRA), Paul Elam (more radical MRA).

3. Traditional Conservatism

Advocates for traditional gender roles, often citing religion, biology, or social stability.

Opposes feminism's challenge to family structures and male leadership.

Key examples: Religious fundamentalists, some nationalist movements.

4. Post-Feminism

Claims that feminism's goals have been achieved, making further activism unnecessary.

Some post-feminists accept gender equality but reject modern feminist activism.

Common in neoliberal and media-driven narratives.

5. Incels & the "Manosphere"

Online subcultures that express hostility toward feminism, often blaming women for societal and personal grievances.

Incels (involuntary celibates) often embrace misogynistic views and see feminism as harmful to men's romantic and social status.

6. Reactionary Feminism (or Anti-Gender Feminism)

Some women reject modern feminism while embracing traditionalist or nationalist ideals.

Examples include conservative women who argue feminism has harmed family life or “gender-critical” feminists who oppose trans inclusion.

7. Biological Determinism

Argues that gender roles are rooted in biology, making feminist efforts to change them unnatural or futile.

Often found in sociobiology, evolutionary psychology, and some political discourse.

8. Anti-Gender Movements

Found in both right-wing and religious movements, opposing feminism alongside LGBTQ+ rights and gender studies.

Active in political efforts to ban gender education, restrict abortion, and reinforce binary gender norms.

How do these movements interact and where do they have the most influence today?

Anti-feminist movements and critiques of feminism take different forms across political, cultural, and digital spaces. Below is an analysis of how these movements interact, their areas of influence, and their potential future impact.

1. The Intersection of Anti-Feminist Movements

Many of these groups overlap in their critiques of feminism but differ in their motivations:

Men's Rights Activists (MRAs) and Incels share concerns about male disenfranchisement but differ in tone—MRAs focus on legal and social issues, while incels often express more extreme misogyny and fatalism.

Traditional conservatives and religious fundamentalists oppose feminism on moral and social grounds, seeing it as a threat to family values. Their opposition aligns with anti-gender movements, which push back against both feminism and LGBTQ+ rights.

Post-feminists and biological determinists argue from a different angle, claiming either that feminism is outdated or that gender roles are biologically fixed and unchangeable.

"Gender-critical" feminists reject trans-inclusive feminism but may still support women's rights, making them both opponents and partial allies of mainstream feminism.

While these groups are distinct, they often reinforce each other's narratives, particularly in online spaces.

2. Key Areas of Influence

A. Politics & Law

Anti-feminist narratives have gained traction in right-wing populist movements, influencing policies around reproductive rights, gender education, and workplace equality.

Countries like Poland, Hungary, and parts of the U.S. have rolled back abortion rights and gender equality initiatives, often framing feminism as a “threat to family values.”

Some MRAs lobby for men's legal rights, particularly in family law, alimony, and domestic violence policies.

B. Online Spaces & Social Media

The "Manosphere" (MRAs, incels, pick-up artists, etc.) thrives on platforms like Reddit, 4chan, and YouTube, where anti-feminist content spreads easily.

Social media influencers and political commentators (e.g., Jordan Peterson, Andrew Tate) have gained massive followings by critiquing feminism and promoting traditional masculinity.

Algorithm-driven radicalization: Young men searching for self-improvement often find themselves exposed to anti-feminist content due to social media recommendation systems.

C. Cultural & Media Representation

Post-feminist narratives are common in mainstream media, particularly in neoliberal and corporate feminism (e.g., “girlboss” culture), which presents feminism as unnecessary or a solved issue.

Pushback against feminist films, books, and movements (e.g., backlash against movies with strong female leads, criticism of #MeToo) reflects broader cultural resistance.

3. Future Trends and Implications

A. Rising Political Backlash

With the resurgence of conservative and nationalist politics, feminist policies may continue facing resistance, particularly in reproductive rights and gender-based protections.

Anti-gender movements in Europe and Latin America have mobilized against feminist and LGBTQ+ legislation, a trend that may expand.

B. Evolution of Online Anti-Feminism

The manosphere is diversifying, with influencers refining their messaging to appeal to wider audiences (e.g., blending self-improvement advice with critiques of feminism).

AI-generated anti-feminist content could amplify misinformation, creating new challenges for feminist discourse.

C. Feminist Adaptations & Countermovements

Intersectional feminism is gaining mainstream traction, countering accusations that feminism only represents elite women.

New digital strategies (e.g., TikTok feminists countering manosphere narratives) show that feminist activism is adapting to online threats.

Conclusion: The Battle for Gender Narratives

While feminism remains a powerful social movement, opposition to it is evolving, adapting to cultural and technological shifts. The future of gender equality debates will likely hinge on:

How feminists respond to online radicalization and misinformation

The ability of gender-equality movements to address male concerns

Whether political and legal systems continue rolling back feminist gains

So does that qualify as a kind of "masculinism"?

Yes, some of these anti-feminist movements can be classified under masculinism, but with important distinctions. Masculinism (or masculism) is a broad term, and not all critiques of feminism fall under its umbrella.

What is Masculinism?

Masculinism refers to ideological perspectives that advocate for men's rights and interests, often in response to perceived disadvantages created by feminism or modern gender roles. It exists in both progressive and reactionary forms:

1. Progressive Masculinism (Pro-Gender Equality)

Seeks to address legitimate male issues (e.g., high male suicide rates, bias in custoday cases, workplace deaths) without opposing feminism.

Argues that patriarchy harms men too (e.g., pressure to be stoic, disposable in war/labor).

Some pro-feminist men (e.g., bell hooks' view of “feminist masculinity”) advocate for a healthier model of masculinity that is not rooted in dominance.

2. Reactionary Masculinism (Anti-Feminist)

Views feminism as a threat to men's rights, blaming it for male struggles in dating, work, and family.

Includes groups like Men's Rights Activists (MRAs), Incels, and Red Pill communities.

Some push for a return to traditional gender roles, while others advocate for male separatism or dominance.

Do Anti-Feminist Movements Qualify as Masculinism?

Yes, but not all of them. Here's how they fit:

Men's Rights Activists (MRAs)–Clearly masculinist, as they focus on legal and social issues affecting men.

The Manosphere (Incels, Red Pill, Pick-Up Artists, MGTOW)–Falls under reactionary masculinism, often hostile to feminism.

Traditional Conservatives & Religious Anti-Feminists–Not always masculinist, as they prioritize family values over explicit male advocacy.

Post-Feminists & Biological Determinists–Not strictly masculinist but often overlap in their skepticism of feminism.

Gender-Critical Feminists–Not masculinist, as they advocate for women's rights but may oppose trans inclusion.

Conclusion: A Spectrum of Masculinism

Some masculinists (progressives) want gender equality but believe men's issues are ignored.

Others (reactionaries) see feminism as a threat and push for male dominance or gender traditionalism.

Anti-feminist movements are often reactionary masculinist, but some (like religious conservatism) oppose feminism without focusing on men's issues.

How has Ken Wilber covered the field of feminist theory?

Ken Wilber has engaged with feminist theory primarily through the lens of Integral Theory, his overarching meta-framework that seeks to integrate various perspectives across disciplines. While he acknowledges the importance of feminism, he critiques certain strands and attempts to place feminist thought within his AQAL (All Quadrants, All Levels) model.

Wilber's Key Engagements with Feminism

1. Feminism in the Context of Developmental Stages

Wilber often frames feminism within hierarchical developmental models (e.g., Spiral Dynamics, Integral Stages), suggesting that different feminist perspectives correspond to different levels of consciousness.

He acknowledges traditional, modern, postmodern, and integral feminism, arguing that each stage offers partial truths but must be transcended and included in a higher synthesis.

2. Critique of Postmodern Feminism

Wilber is critical of postmodern and deconstructive feminisms (e.g., Judith Butler, poststructuralist gender theory). He argues that they focus too much on relativism and social constructionism, undermining deeper integrative perspectives.

He sees radical feminism, gender theory, and intersectionality as useful but incomplete, as they often deny biological and developmental dimensions of gender.

His critique aligns with his broader post-postmodern stance, where he argues that postmodernism deconstructs but fails to reconstruct.

3. Integral Feminism: A Holistic Approach

Wilber promotes what could be called “Integral Feminism”, which seeks to include:

Biological realities (e.g., evolutionary psychology, sexual dimorphism).

Social and cultural influences (e.g., feminist critiques of patriarchy).

Psychological and spiritual development (e.g., feminine and masculine archetypes, transpersonal growth).

Systems analysis (e.g., how gender roles function within society).

He argues that a truly integral feminism must recognize both the relative and absolute dimensions of gender—seeing both social construction and deeper spiritual realities.

4. Feminine and Masculine Polarities

Wilber often discusses masculine and feminine polarities not just as social constructs but as deep archetypal or evolutionary forces.

He draws from thinkers like Carl Jung (anima/animus) and Eastern traditions (yin/yang) to argue that gender has deeper psychological and even metaphysical dimensions.

Some critics see this as essentialist (i.e., reinforcing traditional gender binaries), while supporters see it as a balanced integration.

5. Relationship to Ecofeminism and Goddess Spirituality

Wilber has engaged with ecofeminist and goddess spirituality perspectives, but he often places them within the Green (postmodern) level of development—useful, but not yet integral.

He appreciates the holistic and relational aspects of ecofeminism but argues that some forms romanticize nature or fall into relativism.

Criticism of Wilber's Approach to Feminism

Hierarchical Framing: Some feminists reject his ranking of feminist perspectives as developmental stages, seeing it as elitist or reductionist.

Masculine Bias? Some argue that Wilber, as a male theorist, prioritizes intellectual abstraction over lived feminist experiences.

Essentialism vs. Constructionism: His use of masculine/feminine polarities is controversial, as some feminists reject such binary categories.

Conclusion: Wilber and Feminism – A Complex Relationship

Wilber engages with feminism through his integrative lens, appreciating its contributions while critiquing postmodern deconstruction, extreme social constructionism, and relativism. His Integral Feminism seeks to include biology, culture, psychology, and spirituality, but it remains controversial in feminist circles due to its hierarchical framing and masculine/feminine essentialism.

Feminist scholar Joyce Nielsen once critiqued Wilber's quip “all these schools agree on is that females exist.”

Joyce Nielsen's critique of Ken Wilber, particularly his quip that “all these schools agree on is that women exist,” raises important questions about how Wilber engages with feminist theory. Her article, "Feminist Fusion or Fission", examines his treatment of feminist schools, his use of gender binaries, and his framing of feminism within his developmental hierarchy.

1. Wilber's Quip: A Dismissal of Feminist Diversity?

Wilber's claim that the only consensus among feminist schools is that “women exist” is meant to highlight the diversity of feminist thought, but Nielsen argues that it oversimplifies and dismisses feminist theoretical contributions.

Feminist theory is indeed pluralistic, but many schools share foundational commitments—such as critiques of patriarchy, gender-based oppression, and systemic inequalities.

Nielsen argues that Wilber fails to engage seriously with feminist epistemology and reduces feminism to a developmental sequence, rather than appreciating its substantive debates.

2. Wilber's Developmental Framing of Feminism

Wilber often places different feminist schools within his hierarchical model of consciousness:

Nielsen argues that Wilber's developmental ranking misrepresents feminism, assuming it moves from “less evolved” (critique) to “more evolved” (integration).

Many feminist scholars reject linear developmental hierarchies, favoring relational, intersectional, and situated knowledge approaches.

3. Gender Essentialism in Wilber's Work

Nielsen critiques Wilber's reliance on masculine/feminine polarities, drawn from Jungian, Taoist, and tantric traditions. She argues that:

Wilber reifies binary gender roles, assuming that masculine = transcendence and feminine = immanence.

This mirrors traditional patriarchal frameworks, even as Wilber claims to transcend them.

Feminist theorists (like Judith Butler) challenge these binaries as socially constructed, not innate.

Wilber's defenders argue that his masculine/feminine distinctions are archetypal, not prescriptive, but Nielsen suggests they still limit feminist insights.

4. Lack of Serious Engagement with Feminist Epistemology

Nielsen argues that Wilber's work does not sufficiently engage with feminist epistemology, which explores:

Situated knowledge (Donna Haraway, Sandra Harding)

Standpoint theory (Nancy Hartsock, Patricia Hill Collins)

The critique of patriarchal science

Instead, Wilber folds feminism into his pre-existing integral model, rather than dialoguing with feminist thinkers on their own terms.

5. Conclusion: Does Wilber Have a Gender Problem?

Nielsen's critique highlights Wilber's dismissal of feminist complexity, reliance on hierarchical framing, and gender essentialism. While Wilber acknowledges feminist contributions, his approach positions feminism within his own system rather than truly integrating its insights.

Curiously, Wilber's vol. 2 of his Kosmos trilogy “Sex, God and Gender” never got published.

Yes, it's intriguing that Volume 2 of Ken Wilber's Kosmos Trilogy, "Sex, God, and Gender," was never published. This volume was meant to explore gender, sexuality, and the divine, but despite years of anticipation, it never materialized.

Possible Reasons for Non-Publication

Wilber's Health Issues & Prioritization of Other Projects

Wilber has struggled with chronic illness (Epstein-Barr virus, CFS-like symptoms), which has delayed many of his projects.

He prioritized other books, like Integral Spirituality (2006) and The Religion of Tomorrow (2017), which focused more on spiritual evolution and postmetaphysical religion than gender.

Intellectual Shifts & Refinements

Wilber may have revised or abandoned earlier ideas about gender, especially given feminist and LGBTQ+ critiques of essentialism.

His emphasis on masculine/feminine polarities may have become less tenable in a post-binary gender discourse.

Potential Backlash from Feminist and LGBTQ+ Thinkers

As Joyce Nielsen's critique shows, Wilber's approach to gender has not been well received by feminist scholars.

His masculine/transcendence vs. feminine/immanence framework could be seen as outdated or even regressive.

If Wilber felt that his ideas would be controversial or misinterpreted, he may have shelved the project.

Changing Cultural Context on Gender & Sexuality

When Wilber was developing his gender theories (1990s-early 2000s), discourse on gender was still rooted in a male/female binary.

The rise of non-binary, queer, and intersectional gender theories may have made his framework seem too rigid or incomplete.

He may have struggled to integrate new gender paradigms without overhauling his earlier work.

Editorial or Publishing Issues

It's also possible that legal, editorial, or publishing constraints prevented its release.

Wilber's later works have been published by smaller presses (e.g., Shambhala, Integral Books), and he may have had trouble finding the right platform.

Did Wilber Quietly Abandon His Gender Theories?

While Wilber still references masculine/feminine principles in some Integral Life content, he has largely shifted away from gender discussions in recent years.

The Religion of Tomorrow (2017) barely touches on gender, suggesting that he may no longer see it as central to his integral vision.

Conclusion: A Mystery in Integral Studies

Without an official statement, we can only speculate why Sex, God, and Gender was never published. However, it seems likely that shifting gender discourse, critical pushback, and Wilber's own intellectual evolution played a role.

In his early work “Up from Eden” he took a detailed look at the matriarchy and patriarchy, and the downsides of both.

Yes, Ken Wilber's Up from Eden: A Transpersonal View of Human Evolution (1981) offers an in-depth analysis of the matriarchal and patriarchal stages of societal development, which he places within the broader context of human evolution and consciousness. His exploration of these stages is foundational in his larger integral framework, reflecting his concern with how both matriarchy and patriarchy have shaped human culture and consciousness—each with its strengths and downsides.

Matriarchy in Wilber's View

In Up from Eden, Wilber describes matriarchy as a stage of human development where feminine energy and nurturing qualities are central to societal organization. He situates this in a pre-historical or early agricultural context, emphasizing the following aspects of matriarchy:

Pre-rational, matrilineal societies: Early societies, in Wilber's view, were likely matrilineal, where ancestry and inheritance were traced through the mother. These societies were more egalitarian, with an emphasis on cooperation, nurturing, and connection with nature.

Connection to nature: Matriarchal societies were often associated with earth-based spirituality, fertility cults, and reverence for the goddess or feminine principle.

Challenges: Wilber acknowledges that while matriarchy had its nurturing and egalitarian strengths, it also had limits. These included lack of hierarchical organization, which could result in fragmentation and difficulties in maintaining larger, more complex societies. There was also an overemphasis on the feminine that could potentially suppress masculine energy and individual differentiation.

Patriarchy and Its Downsides

Wilber then explores the rise of patriarchy as a later stage of cultural evolution, which he views as emerging alongside the development of rationality, civilization, and state structures.

Centralized control and hierarchy: Patriarchy, in Wilber's framework, marks a transition to more hierarchical, rational, and individualistic societies. With the rise of male-oriented structures (e.g., monarchy, state governance, and priesthoods), the masculine principle begins to dominate, which he believes brought with it both positive and negative outcomes.

Rationality and individuation: The rise of patriarchal society coincides with the development of abstract thinking and individual rights, which Wilber views as both a necessary step forward and a potential source of disconnection from nature and communal life.

Authoritarian tendencies: However, patriarchy's downsides, according to Wilber, include oppression, hierarchical control, and authoritarian structures that marginalize both women and non-conforming men. Patriarchy's overemphasis on rationality and materialism can lead to the domination of nature, disconnection from the sacred feminine, and the suppression of emotional and spiritual dimensions of life.

Wilber's Critique of Both Systems

Wilber's approach to matriarchy and patriarchy is not simply to condemn one in favor of the other. Rather, he recognizes that both systems have inherent limitations:

Matriarchy: Although egalitarian and cooperative, matriarchy might lack the organizational structure and complexity required for larger civilizations. The emphasis on communal values could also suppress individual autonomy and rational development.

Patriarchy: While patriarchy has led to advances in rationality, science, and technology, it has also fostered domination, oppression, and war. The patriarchal emphasis on hierarchy, control, and power can lead to disconnection from the natural world and a narrowing of consciousness (e.g., the over-reliance on logic and materialism).

Transcending Both: The Integral Vision

In Wilber's framework, the next evolutionary step beyond both matriarchy and patriarchy is to integrate the strengths of both systems while transcending their limitations. This integral approach would:

Balance the masculine and feminine: An ideal society, according to Wilber, would combine the best aspects of both matriarchy and patriarchy, creating a culture that is rational and hierarchical when necessary but also nurturing, communal, and inclusive.

Spiritual development: Wilber believes that by evolving spiritually, humans can move beyond these dualities and create a society based on higher consciousness, holistic thinking, and compassionate action. This includes transcending rigid gender roles, embracing gender fluidity, and fostering non-dual awareness.

Conclusion: A Balanced Evolution

Wilber's analysis of matriarchy and patriarchy in Up from Eden provides a historical and developmental perspective on gender relations. Rather than idealizing one system over the other, he seeks a more integrated approach that draws upon the strengths of both the feminine and masculine while acknowledging their respective downsides. The goal is to move beyond rigid gender binaries and develop a more holistic, spiritually enlightened society.

How has Wilber's theory evolved since Up from Eden?

Ken Wilber's exploration of matriarchy and patriarchy in Up from Eden laid the groundwork for many of his later ideas in Integral Theory, particularly in his treatment of gender, evolution, and consciousness. Since that early work, Wilber has evolved his thinking in response to cultural shifts, gender theory critiques, and the development of his integral framework. Below, we explore how Wilber's ideas on matriarchy and patriarchy have evolved and how they intersect with his later works.

1. From Evolutionary History to Integral Framework

Up from Eden focused primarily on historical and developmental stages of human evolution, where gender roles were situated within the broader biological and cultural evolution of humanity.

As Wilber's work evolved, he moved towards an integral model (AQAL – All Quadrants, All Levels), which sought to map the evolution of consciousness in a more comprehensive and multidimensional way. This shift brought gender and sexuality into the broader context of personal, cultural, and systemic evolution.

2. The Development of AQAL and Gender

Wilber's AQAL framework (which consists of four quadrants, multiple levels, lines of development, states of consciousness, and types) helps explain how gender and sexuality fit into a broader evolutionary context. He began to integrate gender into the overall model of consciousness development:

Quadrants: Gender issues are not just seen in terms of individual psychological development (the interior individual quadrant) or cultural norms (the interior collective quadrant), but also in terms of external structures (the exterior individual quadrant, which includes biology and anatomy) and social systems (the exterior collective quadrant, which includes politics and culture).

Levels: Gender roles and expectations evolve across different levels of consciousness. For example, a traditional, conservative understanding of gender might belong to a lower, pre-rational level of development, while more complex and postmodern views of gender fluidity emerge at higher, more complex levels of consciousness.

States and Types: Wilber's inclusion of states of consciousness (e.g., meditative states, peak experiences) allows for the exploration of transcendental and non-dual experiences of gender, moving beyond binary roles. Additionally, types (e.g., personality types, archetypes) suggest that while gender differences may exist, they are not rigid or essential, but rather fluid and contextual.

3. Reconceiving Masculine and Feminine in Integral Theory

In later works like Integral Spirituality (2006) and The Religion of Tomorrow (2017), Wilber moved beyond his earlier polarizing views of masculine and feminine energies:

Masculine/Feminine Archetypes: While still influenced by Jungian archetypes (anima/animus), Wilber's understanding evolved from an essentialist view of the masculine as transcendence and the feminine as immanence, to an understanding that both masculine and feminine principles are present in all individuals, transcending gender binaries.

Wilber also acknowledges the influence of feminism, incorporating the idea that gender is socially constructed in many ways but still maintains that certain biological and evolutionary factors shape our understanding of gender. He tries to integrate feminist critiques with his spiritual and transpersonal insights.

4. Postmodern Feminism and Critiques of Gender Essentialism

Wilber's initial focus on gender dualism (masculine/feminine) was increasingly challenged by postmodern feminism, which questioned essentialist views of gender. Thinkers like Judith Butler and Donna Haraway argued that gender is not inherent or fixed, but socially constructed and performative.

Wilber's early essentialist framing of gender was, and continues to be, controversial in feminist circles. In response, he sought to broaden his model and acknowledge the socially constructed nature of gender, while still retaining his belief in biological and evolutionary dimensions.

Wilber's AQAL model allows him to incorporate postmodern views of gender while still offering a broader evolutionary and developmental perspective.

5. The Integral Approach to Gender Fluidity and Non-Duality

In his more recent works, Wilber has begun to embrace the possibility of non-dual gender identities and the fluidity of gender in ways that reflect the growing cultural awareness around LGBTQ+ issues. This marks a significant shift from his earlier essentialism:

Wilber's non-dual philosophy emphasizes that gender is not just a binary, but a spectrum that can transcend traditional categories. Non-duality suggests that both masculine and feminine energies exist in everyone and that these energies can flow and transform through higher states of consciousness.

His integral spirituality suggests that at the highest levels of spiritual evolution, one transcends rigid dualities, including those of gender. This means that individuals may experience a fluid, integrated sense of self that includes all gender expressions as part of their larger, holistic being.

6. Integral Feminism: A Balanced Synthesis

Wilber's attempt to integrate feminism into his integral model is complex and still a work in progress. As noted in his earlier works, Wilber's ideal of an integral feminism would integrate:

Feminist critiques of patriarchy: He recognizes the importance of feminist movements in challenging oppressive structures and redefining gender roles.

Biological and evolutionary insights: Wilber argues that a balanced feminism must also acknowledge the biological differences between men and women, particularly in terms of evolutionary psychology and sexual dimorphism.

Psychological and spiritual growth: An integral feminism, according to Wilber, would also focus on spiritual transcendence, where men and women evolve beyond rigid gender roles towards a higher consciousness that integrates masculine and feminine energies.

7. Criticism and Gender Evolution

Despite his attempts to integrate diverse perspectives, Wilber's work remains controversial in some feminist circles. Many feel that his hierarchical framework still doesn't adequately address intersectionality, gender fluidity, or the lived experiences of women and non-binary people.

Some critics also argue that Wilber's focus on spiritual transcendence can overlook the material and structural aspects of gender inequality.

Others suggest that Wilber's evolutionary approach to gender may still reinforce traditional roles, rather than challenging societal norms around gender entirely.

Conclusion: A Journey Toward Integration

Wilber's exploration of matriarchy, patriarchy, and gender evolution has evolved over time from an initial historical and essentialist view to a more integrated, multifaceted approach. Through his AQAL framework, he attempts to balance the biological, psychological, social, and spiritual dimensions of gender.

While Wilber has made strides in incorporating postmodern critiques and embracing gender fluidity, his model remains a work in progress—especially when it comes to reconciling feminist and LGBTQ+ perspectives with his broader evolutionary and spiritual goals.

Currently, the question “is sex binary?” is hotly debated, with evolutionary biologists joining reactionary conservatists against “woke” culture.

Yes, the question of whether sex is binary has become a highly charged debate, involving scientists, activists, and political ideologues. The controversy is fueled by tensions between biological essentialism and social constructivism, with evolutionary biologists often aligning (sometimes uneasily) with conservative voices against what they see as ideological distortions of science. Let's break it down.

1. The Evolutionary Biology Perspective: Sex as a Binary

Most evolutionary biologists argue that sex is fundamentally binary, based on gamete production:

Males produce small gametes (sperm)

Females produce large gametes (eggs)

No third gamete type has been discovered in nature.

This binary reproductive model is deeply embedded in evolutionary theory, shaping sexual selection, reproductive strategies, and species survival. From this standpoint, many biologists reject the idea that sex is a spectrum and insist that biological sex is a fixed reality.

Prominent evolutionary biologists like Richard Dawkins and Colin Wright have publicly criticized postmodern gender theories, arguing that ideology should not override biological facts.

2. The Gender Studies Perspective: Sex as a Spectrum

In contrast, scholars from gender studies, sociology, and parts of biology argue that sex is not purely binary, emphasizing natural variation and intersex conditions:

Intersex individuals (who may have chromosomal, gonadal, or hormonal variations) challenge the strict binary.

Genetic and hormonal variations (e.g., Androgen Insensitivity Syndrome, Klinefelter syndrome) show that sex differentiation is complex.

Brain and psychological differences suggest that gender identity does not always align with biological sex.

This view holds that while reproductive roles are binary, biological sex itself is diverse—a spectrum rather than a strict dichotomy.

3. Political and Cultural Dimensions: A Science vs. Ideology Clash?

The politicization of this debate has led to unusual alliances:

Conservatives and Evolutionary Biologists: Many conservatives have embraced the biological sex binary argument to push back against trans rights activism and gender ideology.

Progressives and Social Scientists: On the other hand, many progressives and gender scholars argue that science itself is influenced by cultural biases and should recognize sex diversity.

The debate is fueled by culture war dynamics, with both sides accusing the other of ideological bias:

Conservatives claim that woke ideology is erasing biological reality.

Progressives argue that biologists are using outdated, rigid models that fail to reflect complexity.

4. Integral Theory's Possible Synthesis

Ken Wilber's Integral Theory could offer a third way to reconcile these perspectives:

Quadrants Approach:

The Upper Right Quadrant (biology) supports the sex binary in reproduction.

The Upper Left Quadrant (individual identity) allows for gender fluidity and non-binary experiences.

The Lower Right Quadrant (social systems) recognizes institutionalized gender roles.

The Lower Left Quadrant (cultural meaning) acknowledges that gender categories are shaped by history and society.

Transcend and Include: Instead of polarizing the debate, Wilber's model suggests that we can recognize biological sex while also validating gender diversity.

Developmental View: From an evolutionary consciousness perspective, humans are moving beyond rigid binaries to embrace a more nuanced, postmodern understanding of identity—while still acknowledging scientific foundations.

Conclusion: A Debate That Won't End Soon

The battle over “Is sex binary?” is unlikely to be resolved anytime soon because it is not just a scientific question—it's also about culture, identity, and politics. Evolutionary biologists and conservatives emphasize biological reproduction, while progressives and gender theorists highlight social complexity and intersex realities.

NOTES

[1] In the chapter "Integral Feminism" in his book The Eye of Spirit (1997) Wilber discussed the following schools of feminist theory:

• Radical feminism
• Constructivist feminism
• Cultural feminism
• Marxist feminism
• Social feminism
• Postmodern feminism
• Existential feminism
• Ecofeminism
• Spiritual feminism
• Integral feminism

In this chapter he also refers to the work-in-progress: "SES is volume 1 of the Kosmos trilogy; in the forthcoming volume 2 (tentatively entitled Sex, God and Gender: The Ecology of Men and Women), I expand and fill in the details of this general model of sex and gender." (p. 190)

[2] See: Joyce Nielsen, "Feminist Fusion or Fission", www.integralworld.net, March 2002.

Feminist answers to questions like the above do vary enormously but they share three unifying premises:

1. they all agree that women are disadvantaged, subordinated, or oppressed;
2. they all try to explain this inequality; and
3. they all believe that something should be done about it.

There is then agreement about the problem but not necessarily about its solution. Feminist as opposed to nonfeminist theories have an emancipatory theme. Their purpose is to liberate at the same time that they explain and understand.