Paper short abstract

Drawing on ethnographic research in New Mexico, USA, this paper theorizes Grof breathwork as an affective infrastructure mediating between embodied practice and socio-political struggle. It examines how feminist facilitation both enables and constrains collective mobilization.

Paper long abstract

Situating Grof breathwork practices within histories of sensory discipline and late-liberal forms of somatic self-governance, this paper draws on ethnographic research in New Mexico. Engaging anthropological critiques of holistic health and neoliberal ethopolitics, I analyze how postsecular breathwork practices function simultaneously as techniques of affective regulation and as sites of ethical and political experimentation.

While often framed as individualized healing modalities, these practices are shaped by facilitation styles grounded in feminist and queer ethics of care. These styles cultivate relational and attunement-based forms of attention that challenge individualized models of therapeutic expertise.

Centering on what one interlocutor calls “the Great Allowing,” the paper examines anger as a political emotion shaped by histories of silencing and structural inequality. It asks whether the cultivation of emotional expression within contemporary ‘spiritual’ spaces enables forms of collective resistance or risks re-individualizing structural harm through therapeutic idioms.

At the same time, breathwork practices are embedded in therapeutic markets, commodified trainings, and holistic imaginaries that can constrain mobilization. It may inadvertently redirect attention from structural violence, while neoliberal somatic ethics situate bodies as sites of moral and emotional accountability. In this tension, breathwork emerges as an ambivalent affective infrastructure: it enables relationality, care, and attunement, while remaining entangled with regimes of self-optimization and governance. It shows how feminist facilitation within breathwork both enables new forms of collective attention and relational engagement, while simultaneously constraining mobilization through its entanglement with therapeutic and marketized frameworks.