The Straightjacket of David Deida

Jayson, I'm so glad you are talking about this topic, which is also relevant to the work I do with women, about empowering authentic sexuality! I agree that Deida's perspective is too black & white, and the way Tantra is being taught in the West is too focused on sexual materialism. I think that a lot of us who've been “on the path” for a long time are getting tired of the never-ending self-improvement treadmill….gotta be a better person, a better lover, a better meditator, and definitely gotta have better orgasms! I think this current time in our collective evolution is more about radical self-acceptance, radical forgiveness, integration, and authenticity, rather than trying to “fix” ourselves to fit into some paradigm of how we are supposed to be.

I've read this article and would like to respond, as I imagine many people who are both more and less advanced than the writer will also be reading it. It was passed to me by a friend who views this article as an articulation of his reservations about doing so-called Deida work.

Statement: When I first got a copy of “Way of The Superior Man” I threw it down. “What kind of arrogant asshole would come up with a title like that?”

Response: The title seems to come from a phrase that appears in classic Chinese texts. The Superior Man is defined by the choices he makes that correctly and sincerely place him and his efforts in the world, not a regal disposition that Wilhelm Reich would define as a character armor, or relativistic as men being superior to women. It's easy for people who are not familiar with translations of Chinese texts, such as Confucious, to have this impression also. It probably should be entitled “The Way of the Superior Masculine”, given that the energetic underpinnings of the work are less about men and women and more about the mansculine/feminine dynamics of a cosmos and the dance humans play in this big mysterium we inhabit and are – but the book has a stated agenda of being supportive to, and addressing, men who are coping with issues of clarity or vagueness in relation to women, work, and the world.

Statement: A couple of years later, I signed up for one of David Deida’s 5-day intensives and got rocked.

Answer: Me, too. I had done some weekends with his assistants and they helped open my heart to myself, and others, and give me useful feedback that was supportive without being mushy or general.

Statement: Then, just last year, I buried the book. Finished. Done. No mas.

Answer: If it’s the original hardcover, please send it to me: It’s worth something, according to Amazon.

Statement: I work with men all the time who have read Deida and been served by the book and by his live events. Deida’s a badass for sure. I believe he is solely responsible for bringing men out of the “new age wimp” mentality that was common in the 80’s and 90’s. He started making “men’s work” sexy and compelling.
So, again, praise to the man and his work. Deep bows.

Answer: On the one hand you’re saying that you work with men who are served by the work as you have. Then you say you bow to it, deeply – but your article isn’t just a critique, it positions your teacher as more reasonable solution to the questions Deida addresses. Unsure of what kind of “deep bows” that is.

Statement: The Deida-Bot / Time and time again I hear friends and clients who dig Deida (otherwise known as Deida-bots) get stuck in his words and concepts. While I realize that is partly the consumer of his information’s responsibility…

Answer: At my Omega session more than 5 years ago, Deida was adding “take what you like and leave the rest”, “These aren’t literal statements – they’re distinctions that I make which I have found useful for progress in these areas – you don’t have to believe any of it for all I care”, or statements very close to that effect.

Statement: , it is also partly the black and white teachings around the masculine and feminine that keeps men trapped.

Answer: For those who have studied Tai Chi, or any Chinese internal martial art, or any martial art, or done anything, exploration of the extremes helps us understand the possible variations in the middle more clearly. He sits and offers explorations of the extremes of masculine and feminine – exploration of one’s “edge” in that regard – in order to travel more freely as body-and-earth-bound consciousness. It’s not a trap: It’s a structure that facilitates learning. Like your friends comments who are adoring ACIM, which says Miracles are learning devices and nothing more than kind of isolated incidents in what could be a fully Miracle-minded individual.

Statement: The basic interpretation of Way of the Superior Man goes like this:
Okay, so I have to find a purpose. If I don’t know that I’m supposed to make that my purpose. If I breathe the right way and get in my masculine trustable power, then she will surrender to me. I am supposed to handle her shit storms even if they are abusive. And most importantly, “I’m supposed to fuck her open to God.” Bottom line? I’m supposed to “act masculine” like David Deida says.

Answer: The basic interpreation of WOTSM is the book. This is an over-simplification and a mis-quote. The book, also, wasn’t written for “you”, and although I don’t have a copy of it with me, I don’t recall it saying “you” are “supposed” to do anything including “act masculine”. That would be along the lines of macho-jerkness which is a contradiction which Deida studiously avoids.

Statement: This typically takes a man into a pattern of trying harder to get masculinity right. If I don’t do masculinity the way Deida says, I’m not a superior man and I’m probably going to remain at stage 1 or 2. I must not be man enough.

Answer: He doesn’t say “get masculinity right” – he basically says “exploring The Masculine can help align you with what’s right for you”.

Statement: Some women have also become trapped. Their version goes something like this: “Why won’t he fuck me open to God?” I can’t believe he isn’t man enough to take me and ravish me. I can’t wait to surrender to him, but he just won’t man up for the task. I’m not sure what’s wrong with him? He’s just too nice. I want him to fuck me and he wants to just talk about his feelings. I better show him I’m mad by screaming at him and
challenging his manhood.”

Answer: Misconstruing and oversimplifying an argument, and then attacking that false representation, is also not the “deep bow” you’re offering earlier.

Statement: The shock and awe of Deida’s live events are quite astounding. Men and women with their clothes on, coming to near orgasm and blowing each other’s minds! Wow. But, anyone who is in a long-term relationship knows the shock and awe is not sustainable.”

Answer: David has said once something to the effect of “you can have more frequent sex or you can have deeper sex that’s less frequent. I don’t think he says that shock and awe last forever as an actual sex act – but people can make their lives more dynamic by shocking and awing themselves through exploration of the masculine and feminine aspects of existence & non-existence. Basically, he’s selling sex to sell God – not the other way around. It’s not “let’s find god through better sex” but “let’s bring God into our lives, and be as God-like as possible while we’re alive so we can feel like we’re more part/not part of things as we need”.

Statement: Sadly, many tantra folks and sexually curious people begin to think what Deida teaches is the norm. Then, when they realize the approach is very challenging to stay with longer than a few months, they begin to think they are doing something wrong, not trying hard enough, and the self-doubt slowly creeps in.
I’m a spiritual dude and have done some serious work on myself. It ain’t happening like that for me in my life. Let’s get real people. Very few of us have mind-blowing sex for years and years on end.
If we are all honest, sex is tricky terrain, particularly in long term relationships. It provokes our deepest wounds and also has the potential to allow us to feel the most cosmic connection on the planet. Factor in children, stress from work, long days, emotional triggers etc, and sex is a crucible.

Answer: Equivocating The Yoga of Sexual Intimacy and Light” with WOTSM and the entire works of Deida is like equivocating Win Chun to Wu Mei – it’s a subset, a condensed version used for a specific purpose. The part does represent the whole, but let’s not confuse the forest for the tree.

Statement: The Double Bind
Without knowing it, Deida’s work has put men in a double bind. On the one hand, men are supposed to show up fully present and it is their responsibility to “open” their woman. On the other hand, if they decide to become real, truthful, and relax into “being” they face getting blamed wimpy, feminine, or called out (in their men’s group or by their woman) for not being man enough.

Answer: Absolutely true in practice, but it’s not just men and women. It’s any dynamic between the person who identifies with consciousness and the people who identify with life. Children are healthy with structure and develop contempt for drunk parents. My woman, indeed, hates when I don’t have a plan, or when I’m unaccountable. Again: The work is broad-spectrum. The Omega institute is a metaphor – it’s not an end unto itself – it just happens to be an easy-to-identify-with metaphor.

Statement: Nevertheless, pretty soon and innocently enough, readers of Deida begin to “perform” to get the technique right. These men, believe, like I did, that if I just “do it right” she will surrender just like the book says. Some of these men don’t have a spiritual practice nor do they want to start one. That would be more “work” a man has to do. For some men, it’s just another self-improvement project that you must master to get the love and sexual intimacy you long for.
However, once you settle into a relationship for longer than a year, his words dry up. The concepts begin to feel flat and simplistic. Paired with my actual, lived experience as a new father and husband, Deida comes up increasingly short.

Answer: Deida can’t explain every permutation of moment for a man as a parent – it’s your job and choice to be lived by that. Are you asking him to write a guide for parents? Sounds interesting.

Statement: I’m noticing the calcification that has happened around Deida and his teachings that have me bored, disinterested and wanting to do triage on couples and male Deida-bots everywhere.

Answer: There’s the agenda. Often students feel they can go beyond, or improve on their teacher’s work. One hopes so for the sake of progress in general. On the other hand, if you’re wanting to do “triage” on couples and “Deida Bots” by marketing yourself to Deida’s market, go ahead – but it seems a disservice to define yourself as being something better or beyond than Deida’s set of information. That said, what is it that you actually stand for? It can’t really be found here. Perhaps that will be your next article, or book.

Statement: Moving beyond Deida. But first I am doing triage on myself by working on an entirely different approach to sexuality. With the ongoing mentorship from David Cates of Deep Masculine, one of the trail blazers of conscious sexuality, I am learning a completely different approach to my sexuality. Accoring to Cates, tantra is dead. He knows the performance trap men get into around sex. Cates’ view is that once we plug into our own bodies from a relaxed place, we can experience sex as new, fresh, cosmic, and sustainable.

Answer: No difference from Deida: Breathe, relax, connect. What’s the problem? I don’t think Deida says “be in your head” and your guy says “breathe” and that’s the big revolution. Deida would agree with you that Tantra is dead, as is any codification of anything. Let’s not “confuse the finger pointing at the moon for the moon itself,” to paraphrase Sheng Yen.

Statement: I imagine other men and women are teaching a new approach to sexuality. It’s time. Sex is a labyrinth of possibilities. Finding the right guide can make the dance feel a whole lot more doable and sustainable.

Answer: I suspect you’re trying to invite people to your teacher’s or your nascient practice through this not-so-veiled invitation.

Statement: Let’s not be complacent about our sex lives, but let’s also be realistic. Sex is yet another vehicle, a mirror, and a path to the love we long for. What realistic steps are you taking to enhance and deepen your sex life?

Answer: I’m not sure what “realistic” means. If you’re equating that with a “middle path” and offering your present teacher as someone who may be representing that, or that your experience as a parent presents you with more of that – that doesn’t mean it’s the “opposite” of Deida’s spectrum. It’s simply using words to describe a kind of space.

In the meantime, I hope you’ll offer more light on this subject that you’re obviously passionate about.

One aspect that you sort of touch on, but don't really hit, is the very nature of spiritual, healing, and transformative work. At its core, any work of the Deida nature has an inherent problem. When they exist as a question that is sought into, often times powerful and profound movement is made in life. When it morphs into the “right thing to do” or the correct way to be, the power of it is lost.

Spiritual and transformative works exist most powerfully in the inquiry and in the being of it. As soon as that seeking is stopped, so goes the power of it. For that matter, religion is similar. When it is a journey about my relationship with God, it has power and magic in it. When it becomes something that is the right thing for everyone or the correct answer for me, it is game over.

Sadly, most people seem to stop the inquiry as soon as they find the right answer. Until it runs out of juice then they go find another right answer.

This has been my experience in every transformational endeavor I have undertaken – Landmark, Sterling HAI, Insight, Deida, MOL, yada, yada, yada. I find it particularly true for the work that has tons and tons of multi-variate cultural things going on – sex, money, men/women, etc. There are so many factors at play in those conversations……….

Perhaps men who are no longer interested or attracted to what David Deida has to offer and are interested in what Gaddis and Cates are putting together fit the more “balanced” model that David Deida describes in his books. He suggests most men are masculine in their core but that there are a few who are more balanced with the energies consistently.

This would allow for the masses of men who are more “masculine” or masculine but it conditioned out of them to be served by Deida's work and for the other more balanced men to benefit from Deida work for a time or a bit but also from a Gaddis and Cates product or service.

I see myself a bit more balanced and fit in at about 65/35% Masculine/Fem (with a plus/minus 5 pts in either direction) :O) I still find Deida relevant to me and I love much of what Jayson offers too.

I'm currently reading “Sex at Dawn”, and one thing that strikes me about both Jayson and Deida's writings is that there seems to be an assumption of long-term, committed monogamy as the natural and desired state for all of us. (By the way, I've read and worked with Superior Man, and it is beneficial)
Yes, we will all benefit from understanding who we are in our gender, and by understanding male/female dynamics. However, it seems to me that perhaps some of the assertions made assume that the natural state for men and women is that long-term committed monogamous relationship.
I don't think we are wired that way…and while that type of relationship might be our ideal that we aspire to, our wiring creates a lot of conflict.
Deida touches on this here and there in Superior Man, and mentions that one must work in the context of one's culture.
I say we should work to change our culture and its assumptions and structure.
Maybe then we can all act more authentically.
Of course, whether it's Jayson, Deida, Cates, or Ryan & Jetha (the couple that authored Sex At Dawn), the most important thing to remember is to think for yourself….

It seems to me that most have missed who Dieda is. He is a teacher, he teaches a class, he is a human with a perspective and beliefes – to assume his ‘class’ is the only one necessary for the degree in life/sexuality – and to think that he truly believes his class is all you need – is just another way of deflecting your own 100% responsibility for you own life and happiness. Or, if you like the 90/10 rule, which I do, make that 90%. and even if he does think he has the full answer, well that right there should tell that he doesn’t. that is basic intuition and if yours is a bit out of whack, then you’re probably the only one that can fix that. Why do we even need to criticize someone who’s work has helped to put us on such a wonderful path to discovery? shouldn’t we just think it’s beautiful that it took us this far and be grateful that we did indeed hit a wall with it, were taken a back and forced to re-evaluate? Is that not what teachers are truly for? is that not a beautiful gift? I read the superior man, at no point did I feel it was saying my femininity gave me the right to be abusive or careless. That is a choice that women who are looking for an excuse to be so, make to read into it. you cannot tell me it’s otherwise. I work with Tantra to help people understand their own and other’s personal boundaries and authentic relating, I KNOW this is what happens. If Christianity has been able to use the bible to justify all sorts of things throughout history, how would Deida’s writings be spared the same? Infact whose writings have ever been spared this? That’s the way it’s supposed to be or we’ll stop thinking for ourselves. Why not just say, Thank you David, for sharing your truth in a way that put me or helped me along the way to mine? Expecting him to have all the answers is as lame as religious followers who are disillusioned into thinking that their pastor/priest should have all the answers and then being disappointed that they don’t. it really is our condition as humans, we want someone else to do it for us. be they religious leaders, doctors, government, whatever. as another basic example, it isn’t any different than a person who becomes religiously vegan, feels better for a while and then a year or two down the road encounters immune system problems because they’re not getting enough protein. Is it really vegan-isms fault? I don’t think so. It is the fault of the person that was looking for the final answer to a problem and stopped listening to their body and soul and it’s ever changing needs for balance. It’s psychological and emotional laziness (aka. fear) – wanting someone/something/anything to tell you exactly how it is so you can grab hold of it and control your world with it – it’s the perfect way to do it because then you can blame them when things go off course. It’s hardly evolution though, is it?
anyway, I am glad there was some recognition here that ‘parts’ of what he teaches are good, and I could be wrong, and I don’t mind if I am, but I still think the bigger picture was missed…

Coming from the feminine side- and as someone who recently tried to read “Dear Lover”- I couldn’t agree more. Deida perpetuates the dichotomous masculine/feminine in a way that truly encourages performance. At times, “Dear Lover” verges on smut novel descriptions of vanilla sex- waiting to be “claimed” and moaning “please, please” as the woman waits for the man to enter her.

I’m not sure I totally understand how this is helping us to truly open to one another. Yes, there needs to be a masculine and a feminine. But must the feminine always be the ravished, while the masculine is the ravisher? And must our conception of sexuality always be divided as such? The shock value descriptions belie the full potential of this work. Perhaps it makes it more accessible to the broader population, but I think we’re missing out on a big part of the conversation.

I’d also, however, like to question your use of the word Tantra. I think in this context, you refer only to the more popularized concepts of tantric sexuality, and not the entirety of the philosophy and system of beliefs. In the fullest depths of tantra, sexuality is not any different from meditation is not any different from sharing a meal, because *everything* is sacred and *everything* is worship. The philosophy of total acceptance.

So, I would beg to differ- Tantra is not dead. Tantra, in fact, is more important than ever. And yes- while we can certainly learn from Deida, I personally have put down “Dear Lover” in favor of learning more from this ancient teaching.

I hope that these comments will serve to both balance some misunderstandings and also add to the conversation:

Jayson, I appreciate that you named clearly, “the interpretation” of Deida’s work… After many years studying David’s work and studying with David, including being a trainer trainee at the one-time 3D intensive – here are some perspectives I came to:

– David himself says, “If you’re looking for 2nd stage work, this is not it.” In other words, David’s deepest gift – as I received it – met those who *already* have/had a 2nd stage healthy we-space dynamic, which include all of the green-meme skills of authenticity with self and others, transparency, compassion, etc. David explicitly wanted to work in the development after that. In reality, however, many who were attracted to the work (at the time I frequented it) were not skilled in healthy 2nd stage we-space work. This left a strange kink in the community (in my opinion) – a bunch of folks trying to channel a higher developmental practice, without having the skills, insight or discernment that would come from a prior stage of development. Result: As a coach, I often found myself working with peers in the community to help with 2nd stage development skill-balancing and healing.

– The map is not the territory. We live in a world of soundbites, 30 second commercials and 180 character texts to each other. As a result we can tend to “rush listen” for the “core message” and then think we “know” what another person is trying to convey. And, often, we can be dead wrong in our interpretations. I watched many of my colleagues in the Deida community take bits out of context, reduce bits to unliveable black-and-white gibberish, and misinterpret practices without the integration of a much larger conversation, and then promote the filtered understand as “David’s Truth”. I know we all have filters, and I too have mine, but I saw a fuller message than that. Just because someone claims that they understand the work doesn’t mean they actually do. In fact, in *any* spiritual community the masses will tend to a reduced understanding where only a handful will embody the core intended transmission. A simple example, my understanding of David’s work in it’s body is not about the sexuality – sex is merely the portal he uses so as to engage a much deeper, richer subtle-field dynamic and transpersonal conversation.

– We humans will be better ‘listeners’ when we learn that everyone has shadow and developmental edges. David is no different, neither is Ken, Marshall, Joseph, or any other ‘teacher’. That means that – inevitably – despite best efforts – transmissions get twisted through the filter of developmental issues. If we audience members can dialogue respectfully and appreciatively about a teacher’s gift – while also being authentic with what we see of shadow and developmental limitations – we can take the gold of a teacher’s work and leave behind the limitations. That doesn’t mean throwing the baby out with the bathwater, no mas. It means realizing there are strengths to be utilized, and a context within which they are coherent. It means “right action” for those teachings, as well as recognizing that there is also a context within which the teachings – or our interpretations – are incomplete. I hope my distinction about David’s 2nd stage commentary will inform us – as his audience – to hold the value of David’s gift as well as we acknowledge the limitations.

In my experience of David, ultimately his invitation was about breaking free of a certain set of limitations and opening energies in areas our culture did not (and still does not) cultivate in healthy ways. He cultivates cross-style archetypal integration toward Self (capital S self) awakening. He activates energy channels and integrates body, mind, and spirit in practice. He gave me and others an opportunity to meet HIS teacher – a spiritual journey that informed my relationship to Grace and enriched my life. He also calls in an opportunity for choice where we can be blinded by societal norms. He plays the instruments of Art, Big Heart, Big Mind, Spirituality and Play as an orchestra few teachers know how to handle. He applies those instruments to something so fundamental with such mastery that people mistake the object as the subject. In all of that mastery, his work is an unparalleled gift (in my opinion).

AND – there’s a “healthy we-space” conversation to be had that was not his gift to give.

Thank you, Jayson, for the ways your work enriches a healthy we-space in relationship and in community.

Blessings,
Maya

Hah. Great article. Indeed few people care to challenge his work. Glad you did.

His work strongly focusses on some aspects of life that indeed often deserve some development, yes. That is good.
I too learned a lot from Deida’s work. I certainly did develop some neglected aspects of who I really am as a human being. And that was a great thing. But then it was time to integrate it into who I really am, and avoid becoming some over the top Deida-fundamentalist. Over-emphasizing some aspect of life is not the way to go.

And trying to be or become like some image in your head is even worse, that will always prove to be a mistake.Then you abuse some useful teachings as a dangling carrot for your own nose…