6 Cliches of "Conscious Sexuality," and How to Move Past Them: Michaela Boehm Interview

The Michael Ellsberg Show

Here is my second in a series of audio interviews with Michaela Boehm, one of the most subtle, advanced and wise teachers about sexuality, spirituality, and the intersection of the two, currently teaching. (You can find out more about Michael at www.michaelaboehm.com - or visit her Soundcloud at www.soundcloud.com/michaela-boehm ) Today’s interview gets a bit controversial- it is entitled "6 Annoying Cliches of 'Conscious Sexuality,' and How to Move Past Them” In this interview, we analyze several ideas about “masculine” and “feminine” that have become orthodoxy within teaching about conscious sexuality. Specifically, we examine the dogmas that men are supposed to be “present, deep, and on purpose” in order to be masculine, whereas women are supposed to be a “wild storm of emotions, radiant, and surrendered” in order to be feminine. These concepts have become so ingrained in the west coast workshop culture that we rarely step back to examine where the concepts might be leading us astray. We discuss where these ideas came from, how they are misunderstood and misapplied, and ways to think about these concepts that don’t lock people into rigid pre-defined gender roles. In this interview, Michaela teaches us about: 5:00 - The folly of trying to teach men to become “deep and present” by teaching them to copy the body language of deep and present men, or trying to “look spiritual" 8:20 - How men can actually develop authentic, deeply-sourced presence 12:30 - The difference between emotional reactivity vs. emotional responsiveness in women 14:25 - The danger of encouraging women to show men their “kali” (destructive energy) without discernment 17:58 - How encouraging men to “penetrate” women with their “presence” can end up being a spiritualized form of invasiveness - and the danger of assuming that if a woman doesn’t “surrender” to these, that she’s “too much in her masculine” 22:00 - Why gender polarity should primarily be played out in the bedroom, and not in the rest of a relationship 34:20 - “Often the most dressed up and shiny women are not the ones who are most sensually alive" 46:01 - The problem with differentiating between “purpose” and “surrender” - because living your purpose requires surrender 46:45 - “You can only fuck well when you’re being fucked well.” 51:13 - The difference between purpose and goal-setting- and the folly of trying to set goals and “be accountable” for achieving your purpose 52:15 - Should we use non-gendered terms to express polarities and erotic tension? “Go vs. flow,” “Dark vs. light,” “Active vs. passive,” “Penetrating and penetrated,” “Dom vs. sub” - beyond “masculine vs. feminine” 54:36 - What is the essence of tantra? 1:01:30 - Surrender, boundaries, control. consent, and the feminine 1:11:58 - The importance of pushing sexual edges only with established partners 1:18:50 - How cultural romance narratives around “ravishing,” “being taken” and “surrender” can lead to people to disconnect from and mis-calibrate the sexual interaction and can lead to consent violations 1:22:48 - How do we square our notions of romantic ravishment and “sweeping her off her feet" from the movies, with proper consent conversations which seem like they may take away from the spontaneity and passion? Enjoy! I hope you find this interview as illuminating and provocative as I did.