The elusive third space: Conspiracy > Problem > Solution ;)
Looking forward to where things go.

Viewing masculinity "based on revelation as understood within the Catholic faith" (i.e., as a fixed and specific thing) is going to put you at odds with the majority of academic literature on this subject that considers masculinity (both within the Catholic tradition and without) as a socially constructed and fluid phenomenon. Certainly, you are free to follow the path you propose, but be aware that many mainstream researchers (i.e., the people who may be marking your PhD and editing journals in which you may wish to publish) will find it problematic.

Interesting. FYI, I write about Catholic masculinity in the following places: http://numenoldmen.wordpress.com/numen-old-men/ http://numenoldmen.wordpress.com/evangelical-and-...

Yes, that takes courage too. I think there are whole careers of philosophical thought that would have panned out differently if folks would admit a change of heart more freely.

Dipsters! I got a genuine chuckle out of that one.

There are some insightful points here, especially about the appearance of intelligence and depth. I’ve lost count of the amount of times it’s been highlighted to me how clever certain dipster communities are when they are, as you say, profoundly anti-intellectual (and not even having the tools at hand to realize this fact).

I find the real challenge is not to identify this fact but to counter it with “I don’t know” statements. I’ve been consciously working on this issue when people ask me questions I’m not confident about: instead of giving the impression of an intelligent response (which is quite easy), I’ve started saying “I don’t really know”. This causes me some anxiety, as I want to give the impression of knowing what I’m talking about, but I’m more interested in cutting through the kind of BS you mention with a form of radical transparency. I think the vulnerability of publicly not knowing is possible one of the only honest signs of intelligence there is.

It's old news for most, but my current favorite play on gansta rap and authenticity is Die Antwoord (also playing expertly on gender and class issues). I was relieved to discover they weren't "for real" after I heard these truly evil genius lyrics: http://lyrics.wikia.com/Die_Antwoord:Beat_Boy

All good points.

I don't think being in the public domain *makes* one psychopathic, rather those who already have psychopathic tendencies are attracted to being in the public domain: the need for public recognition speaks to a variety of pathologies (I work on mine all the time!). The sorted, sincere seeker may have less desire for public recognition, and therefore never sets out on the path to guru (psychopathic or otherwise).

But yes, power corrupts as well.

It’s a bit of a tangent to your argument, but it seems to me there is often something inherent in the personalities of people who perform in the public domain that tends toward psychopathic behavior. The switch from sincere seeker to psychopathic guru is then one of operating in the private vs public domain?

Regarding your Wilber quote, as some folks know I have been critiquing this point from a gender point of view for a while now, but I see recently race is now the theme of choice "having given it all due respect and honor": http://integrallife.com/node/84642
LOL: I'd love to see someone who seriously works around issues of race unpack that one.