Name an existential threat to our species or our planet that is not driven by men or masculinism.
1) Abortion
2) Transing kids
3) Global Warming.
The problem is not masculinity any more than it's feminism. It's a lack of balance. Simply put, there is more Yin than Yang. The cosmic scales are too heavily weighed in one direction or another.
Or to put it in the simplest terms possible. Men and women have forgotten how to work together to raise the next generation. There are broken homes where there shouldn't be. There are no-fault divorces when they should have stuck it out.
It's like I told someone last week. Men are good at building, fixing, or destroying things. Women are excellent at creation. Only a woman can create a new life.
In the old world, men were hunters and gatherers, while women tended the home and minded the finances.
Until we find and get back to that balance, we'll keep having these problems.
Joseph Wiess, how is global warming not driven by men or masculinism?
" Men are good at building, fixing, or destroying things. Women are excellent at creation."
--- Women are good at creation AND maintenance but both sexes can do all of it (with the exception of giving birth, obviously).
"In the old world, men were hunters and gatherers, while women tended the home and minded the finances."
--- Not quite. And you're confusing some things you've read or heard about here. Hunters and gatherers don't have "finances" like that (stone age style tribes that are still alive today like the Sentinelese show). Moreover, the outdated hunting-gathering gender roles theory which you mistakenly repeat here is not that "men hunted and gathered while women stayed inside a hut" but "men hunted and women gathered". However we now know that hunting and gathering was not divided like that (nor is it now in current "primitive" tribes still living) but that women and men did BOTH hunting and gathering.
I agree with you that "balance" is important but strictly enforced gender roles and gender expectations are not balanced. Balance is let people contribute in whatever they feel most fit for and inspired by. There's no reason to pigeon hole anyone.
Also, over time, even as most cultures "progressed" beyond "primitive" hunting-gathering tribes and moved on to agriculture, then industry and now digital technology, there was never a period of time when most women stayed at home. That was always reserved for women of financial means and social status. The vast majority of women (and even children) throughout history have had to step outside the home to work for money.
More of the same will not improve our situation. Abortion is not an existential threat. It is not an issue in societies that respect women as full human beings. It only becomes objectionable in societies that view women and children as property to be controlled.
Transing kids is based in Queer Theory, the product of a male pedophile, and it is being pushed by male transexual billionaires and supported by male politicians. As with any male atrocity, there are female collaborators and handmaidens, but the trans movement is driven by male fetishes.
Climate change is from burning fossil fuels, dumping pollution in our water resources and monoculture farming. Those activities are rarely controlled by women.
The idea that men were hunters and women tended the home is a 19th century dream of male archeologists. How many graves full of hunting trophies and treasures have to turn out to be females' before men admit that women were hunters, too? Child rearing was a community endeavor once a child was weaned. The nuclear family of one couple and their kids living alone in a single dwelling is an aberration in human history. We simply can't envision anything else because patriarchy conditions us to believe it's natural and a sign of advancement. And yes, there is a lack of harmony between Yin and Yang. There is too much Yang - the male principle, and not enough Yin, the female principle, which ought to exist in a larger proportion. A 50-50 balance is stagnation. Nature requires prime numbers for movement to function. Instead of the patriarchal, dualist yin/yang symbol, picture a pentacle in a circle, be cause life is more complex than either/or. In Nature, the female always appears in greater numbers. Nature prefers Her own sex. Humans have been killing girl babies by the millions. There are villages in China and India where they have too many single males because there are not enough women for them to marry. In true patriarchal fashion, they traffick women in from other countries. Having a surplus of males is dangerous - there's an increase in violence and crime and a civilization will eventually die out. To sustain a civilization, there has to be a surplus of females because it takes so long to gestate a baby. The existence of violent women doesn't negate the peaceful influence of women within a society. Females create, men consume .
When 930,000 abortions are induced per year (According to the CDC), I consider that a crisis. That puts us below replenishment levels. That mean we will have more elderly people and not younger people to help take care of them. It's not just our country, it's almost every country, with death merchants like Bill Gates going of their way to sterilize young women in other countries.
Yes, Transing children is a pedophilic billionaires, but if the common school teacher (of which 88% of them are female,) weren't pushing this, we wouldn't have this problem. It's mainly affecting young women, who get unnecessary surgeries, such a removing perfectly healthy breast tissue, and some even going as far as having their reproductive systems removed.
I would like to say something about this: "Child rearing was a community endeavor once a child was weaned. The nuclear family of one couple and their kids living alone in a single dwelling is an aberration in human history."
I agree wholeheartedly. I hate the term Nuclear Family. I prefer the Traditional Family, which included Mothers, Fathers, Uncles, Aunts, Cousins, Grandparents. These were small communities of their own.
Those villages in China are that way because the CCP mandated "one child" policies and families killed girls because they were considered not to be needed. That level of stupidity should have crumbled those civilizations completely, but it didn't, and now they are having to find illegal ways of bringing women into that area.
"Nature prefers Her own sex. Humans have been killing girl babies by the millions" Most of which are women killing their own daughter via induced abortion. It's not men telling women to get an abortion, it's women willingly walking into those murder dens and laying on table. Oddly enough, it's men who are trying to save the little girl babies.
If Nature prefers her own sex, then perhaps women should stop having abortions. I would have thought a goddess would put an emphasis on childbirth and raising children.
Joseph: "I agree wholeheartedly. I hate the term Nuclear Family. I prefer the Traditional Family, which included Mothers, Fathers, Uncles, Aunts, Cousins, Grandparents. These were small communities of their own."
--- India (and some other countries) have what is called "the joint family". Sons live at home with their parents forever while their sisters go to live with their in-laws once they are married. So basically when a girl (child marriage still happens) or woman marries, she goes to live in a "joint family home" with her in-laws. Does this work out fabulously? Sometimes. There's a spectrum. If her in-laws are respectful, kind, loving, supportive, etc. it can be a great set-up. However it is not uncommon for in-laws to be abusive tyrants and treat her like a slave. Between these 2 extremes of fabulous and hellish is an entire spectrum. But in any case some young people in India now are actually hoping for a "nuclear family" set up because at the very least it gives the married couple some privacy and space to breathe.
It's easy to look at one's own situation or culture, see the flaws and think some other culture or way of life has it better, but there are pros and cons in every situation. People have a tendency to idealize or romanticize "the good ol' days" or other cultures but the good 'ol days weren't always that good and other cultures have their own issues too.
"Most of which are women killing their own daughter via induced abortion. It's not men telling women to get an abortion, it's women willingly walking into those murder dens and laying on table. Oddly enough, it's men who are trying to save the little girl babies."
--- Absolutely false. In India when a girl or woman marries into a joint family her major life decisions are made by her in-laws and the controllers of the family which tend to be main patriarch, that is the house father/grandfather and the oldest son (who might be her husband or older brother-in-law) and her husband. Sex-selective abortions in India are not a decision made by the mother or even the couple together. It's made by the controllers of the "joint family". She has to do what they say or face dire consequences. Really dire consequences.
It’ seems pretty clear from history, that it’s pretty much about biology: Testosterone and Estrogen. Despite the changes in culture, etc., these biological hormones seem to tell a pretty consistent story. And rather than blame individuals or clans, etc., for violence, oppression, and so forth, it really is about some fundamental biological differences.
For the sake of the future of humankind, we need to find ways to bridge and manage this different hormonal inheritance switch that we can become a more cooperative species.
Cooperation is what made humans successful as a species. Our culture indoctrinates us to believe that violence, greed, jealousy and war are unavoidable so that we don't demand any better from our leaders. I'm all for greater emphasis on cooperation. It might be our only way forward.
OK, what you're calling a traditional family would be what I call matrilineal kinship groups. Same thing, multiple generations working together, younger adults doing the hard physical labor and the grandparents probably watching the kids. It's a very healthy, functional way to live. So we agree on something.
Men are not the ones protecting girl babies. Even in our culture, many men demand a male heir. In very oppressive countries women can be killed if she can't produce one. Not all girl babies are aborted, which is a much kinder thing than killing them when they're born or leaving them outside to die of exposure, which happens more often than anyone will admit. A fetus is not a baby. It has no viable brain until 20 weeks. The vast majority of abortions in the US are performed before 12 weeks, 16 at the latest. Anything after that is done for health reasons - a non-viable fetus or a threat to the mother's life. Anything that ends a pregnancy is called an abortion. A miscarriage is called a spontaneous abortion. A D&C is considered an abortion. It's a medical term that most legislators and religious extremists don't understand. There was a proposal in the Ohio legislature that wanted to require that doctors reimplant ectopic pregnancies. That can't be done, an ectopic pregnancy is already dead, but an ignorant man wanted to make it a law. Luckily it didn't pass. Mike Pence just said women should have to continue to carry nonviable fetuses. That means women would risk organ damage, infertility and death for a baby that has already, or will soon, die. The aforementioned ectopic pregnancy will cause a woman to die an agonizing death if not terminated. A woman is a living being with hopes, dreams, rights, friends and family. She has a right to live. She has a right to control whether she risks her life to bring life into the world. Like many men, you seem to identify with the fetus rather than the woman. It's not a person yet. Whether it ever becomes a person should be the mother's decision. A woman recently testified in a lawsuit against Texas that she had a very wanted pregnancy in which the baby had no brain. They made her carry it until she was literally at death's door, causing organ damage and likely making her infertile. As tragic as losing a baby can be, if she'd had a proper abortion, she would have recovered in a few months and could have gone on to try again. Denying the right to abortion will kill women. That is inevitable. It will cause women to suffer unnecessarily. It will cause physical impairments that might never heal. All of that for something that will never, ever be a baby. As for elective abortion, if we had a proper social safety net there would be far fewer abortions, but we don't. Women are not guaranteed healthcare, child care, housing or money for groceries. We have some programs to help some people with those things in some places, but many have cruel means testing and work requirements that cause too many to fall through the cracks and which makes proper childcare impossible if there are no compatible jobs in the neighborhood. Americans simply don't value women, or moms, or kids. If you're going to leave a young mother with no support system, it is wrong to force her to reproduce against her will. Again, it forces suffering on the woman against her will. A being who does not have autonomy over their own body is not free. Abortion has to be a part of a woman's healthcare, just as it has been since the beginning of time. The Goddess is about reverence for both birth and death. A woman's choice is sacred.
A 20 week baby is past the point of an elective abortion. It's as safe here as on Mars. If it dies in utero, or is otherwise non-viable, then the mother would have to abort it. If the Mother's life were at risk, it's more of a dilemma, but nobody carries a baby for five months then arbitrarily decides to abort it. That simply doesn't happen.
I agree about the male heir thing, but it's still very important in certain cultures and religions.
We've had a good run, Mankind. (Not. And not MANkind). I think back to the end of the original "Planet of the Apes," ... and how does it all end for humans? How do we end up destroying ourselves? You remind us that Gaia could easily heal herself -- just shed herself of the stubborn and selfish ones with a pandemic (of course the weak get swept in, too. And the caring and selfless. Not all of the really rich and greedy, alas). For the overly zealous, uptight, religious patriarchs -- is there any self-preservational reason that nature (or god for that matter) would increase the numbers of the sexually nonbinary in humans? Maybe to slow down our over-population? Sometimes, the simplest theory is the right answer -- humans are just too complicated to survive. Good riddance. It amazes me how there are anti-science pilots who somehow manage to keep their planes in the air. We've made it too easy, no? I appreciate you trying to find the answers, Morgaine, but is there even a way to show humans their folly without them learning "the hard way?" Oh, I see. If we can just take the power away from the worst ones... which may be us. Peace, Morgaine,... somehow. Hey! Which brings me to your original mission statement. Weren't you going to write about health and well-being topics, too? I could be mistaken, and not as urgent... but it may give you rest at 3:00 AM.
Yes! I need to work on some articles about Keto and the Standard American Diet! I've had a lot going on so my writing has been mostly reactive, but I'll make an effort to get to that because it is far more important with the current prices for insulin.
Name an existential threat to our species or our planet that is not driven by men or masculinism.
1) Abortion
2) Transing kids
3) Global Warming.
The problem is not masculinity any more than it's feminism. It's a lack of balance. Simply put, there is more Yin than Yang. The cosmic scales are too heavily weighed in one direction or another.
Or to put it in the simplest terms possible. Men and women have forgotten how to work together to raise the next generation. There are broken homes where there shouldn't be. There are no-fault divorces when they should have stuck it out.
It's like I told someone last week. Men are good at building, fixing, or destroying things. Women are excellent at creation. Only a woman can create a new life.
In the old world, men were hunters and gatherers, while women tended the home and minded the finances.
Until we find and get back to that balance, we'll keep having these problems.
Joseph Wiess, how is global warming not driven by men or masculinism?
" Men are good at building, fixing, or destroying things. Women are excellent at creation."
--- Women are good at creation AND maintenance but both sexes can do all of it (with the exception of giving birth, obviously).
"In the old world, men were hunters and gatherers, while women tended the home and minded the finances."
--- Not quite. And you're confusing some things you've read or heard about here. Hunters and gatherers don't have "finances" like that (stone age style tribes that are still alive today like the Sentinelese show). Moreover, the outdated hunting-gathering gender roles theory which you mistakenly repeat here is not that "men hunted and gathered while women stayed inside a hut" but "men hunted and women gathered". However we now know that hunting and gathering was not divided like that (nor is it now in current "primitive" tribes still living) but that women and men did BOTH hunting and gathering.
I agree with you that "balance" is important but strictly enforced gender roles and gender expectations are not balanced. Balance is let people contribute in whatever they feel most fit for and inspired by. There's no reason to pigeon hole anyone.
Also, over time, even as most cultures "progressed" beyond "primitive" hunting-gathering tribes and moved on to agriculture, then industry and now digital technology, there was never a period of time when most women stayed at home. That was always reserved for women of financial means and social status. The vast majority of women (and even children) throughout history have had to step outside the home to work for money.
More of the same will not improve our situation. Abortion is not an existential threat. It is not an issue in societies that respect women as full human beings. It only becomes objectionable in societies that view women and children as property to be controlled.
Transing kids is based in Queer Theory, the product of a male pedophile, and it is being pushed by male transexual billionaires and supported by male politicians. As with any male atrocity, there are female collaborators and handmaidens, but the trans movement is driven by male fetishes.
Climate change is from burning fossil fuels, dumping pollution in our water resources and monoculture farming. Those activities are rarely controlled by women.
The idea that men were hunters and women tended the home is a 19th century dream of male archeologists. How many graves full of hunting trophies and treasures have to turn out to be females' before men admit that women were hunters, too? Child rearing was a community endeavor once a child was weaned. The nuclear family of one couple and their kids living alone in a single dwelling is an aberration in human history. We simply can't envision anything else because patriarchy conditions us to believe it's natural and a sign of advancement. And yes, there is a lack of harmony between Yin and Yang. There is too much Yang - the male principle, and not enough Yin, the female principle, which ought to exist in a larger proportion. A 50-50 balance is stagnation. Nature requires prime numbers for movement to function. Instead of the patriarchal, dualist yin/yang symbol, picture a pentacle in a circle, be cause life is more complex than either/or. In Nature, the female always appears in greater numbers. Nature prefers Her own sex. Humans have been killing girl babies by the millions. There are villages in China and India where they have too many single males because there are not enough women for them to marry. In true patriarchal fashion, they traffick women in from other countries. Having a surplus of males is dangerous - there's an increase in violence and crime and a civilization will eventually die out. To sustain a civilization, there has to be a surplus of females because it takes so long to gestate a baby. The existence of violent women doesn't negate the peaceful influence of women within a society. Females create, men consume .
When 930,000 abortions are induced per year (According to the CDC), I consider that a crisis. That puts us below replenishment levels. That mean we will have more elderly people and not younger people to help take care of them. It's not just our country, it's almost every country, with death merchants like Bill Gates going of their way to sterilize young women in other countries.
Yes, Transing children is a pedophilic billionaires, but if the common school teacher (of which 88% of them are female,) weren't pushing this, we wouldn't have this problem. It's mainly affecting young women, who get unnecessary surgeries, such a removing perfectly healthy breast tissue, and some even going as far as having their reproductive systems removed.
I would like to say something about this: "Child rearing was a community endeavor once a child was weaned. The nuclear family of one couple and their kids living alone in a single dwelling is an aberration in human history."
I agree wholeheartedly. I hate the term Nuclear Family. I prefer the Traditional Family, which included Mothers, Fathers, Uncles, Aunts, Cousins, Grandparents. These were small communities of their own.
Those villages in China are that way because the CCP mandated "one child" policies and families killed girls because they were considered not to be needed. That level of stupidity should have crumbled those civilizations completely, but it didn't, and now they are having to find illegal ways of bringing women into that area.
"Nature prefers Her own sex. Humans have been killing girl babies by the millions" Most of which are women killing their own daughter via induced abortion. It's not men telling women to get an abortion, it's women willingly walking into those murder dens and laying on table. Oddly enough, it's men who are trying to save the little girl babies.
If Nature prefers her own sex, then perhaps women should stop having abortions. I would have thought a goddess would put an emphasis on childbirth and raising children.
Joseph: "I agree wholeheartedly. I hate the term Nuclear Family. I prefer the Traditional Family, which included Mothers, Fathers, Uncles, Aunts, Cousins, Grandparents. These were small communities of their own."
--- India (and some other countries) have what is called "the joint family". Sons live at home with their parents forever while their sisters go to live with their in-laws once they are married. So basically when a girl (child marriage still happens) or woman marries, she goes to live in a "joint family home" with her in-laws. Does this work out fabulously? Sometimes. There's a spectrum. If her in-laws are respectful, kind, loving, supportive, etc. it can be a great set-up. However it is not uncommon for in-laws to be abusive tyrants and treat her like a slave. Between these 2 extremes of fabulous and hellish is an entire spectrum. But in any case some young people in India now are actually hoping for a "nuclear family" set up because at the very least it gives the married couple some privacy and space to breathe.
It's easy to look at one's own situation or culture, see the flaws and think some other culture or way of life has it better, but there are pros and cons in every situation. People have a tendency to idealize or romanticize "the good ol' days" or other cultures but the good 'ol days weren't always that good and other cultures have their own issues too.
"Most of which are women killing their own daughter via induced abortion. It's not men telling women to get an abortion, it's women willingly walking into those murder dens and laying on table. Oddly enough, it's men who are trying to save the little girl babies."
--- Absolutely false. In India when a girl or woman marries into a joint family her major life decisions are made by her in-laws and the controllers of the family which tend to be main patriarch, that is the house father/grandfather and the oldest son (who might be her husband or older brother-in-law) and her husband. Sex-selective abortions in India are not a decision made by the mother or even the couple together. It's made by the controllers of the "joint family". She has to do what they say or face dire consequences. Really dire consequences.
It’ seems pretty clear from history, that it’s pretty much about biology: Testosterone and Estrogen. Despite the changes in culture, etc., these biological hormones seem to tell a pretty consistent story. And rather than blame individuals or clans, etc., for violence, oppression, and so forth, it really is about some fundamental biological differences.
For the sake of the future of humankind, we need to find ways to bridge and manage this different hormonal inheritance switch that we can become a more cooperative species.
"It’ seems pretty clear from history, that it’s pretty much about biology: Testosterone and Estrogen. ...
For the sake of the future of humankind, we need to find ways to bridge and manage this different hormonal inheritance"
--- Well, there is hormone therapy. Is that what you are hinting at?
Cooperation is what made humans successful as a species. Our culture indoctrinates us to believe that violence, greed, jealousy and war are unavoidable so that we don't demand any better from our leaders. I'm all for greater emphasis on cooperation. It might be our only way forward.
OK, what you're calling a traditional family would be what I call matrilineal kinship groups. Same thing, multiple generations working together, younger adults doing the hard physical labor and the grandparents probably watching the kids. It's a very healthy, functional way to live. So we agree on something.
Men are not the ones protecting girl babies. Even in our culture, many men demand a male heir. In very oppressive countries women can be killed if she can't produce one. Not all girl babies are aborted, which is a much kinder thing than killing them when they're born or leaving them outside to die of exposure, which happens more often than anyone will admit. A fetus is not a baby. It has no viable brain until 20 weeks. The vast majority of abortions in the US are performed before 12 weeks, 16 at the latest. Anything after that is done for health reasons - a non-viable fetus or a threat to the mother's life. Anything that ends a pregnancy is called an abortion. A miscarriage is called a spontaneous abortion. A D&C is considered an abortion. It's a medical term that most legislators and religious extremists don't understand. There was a proposal in the Ohio legislature that wanted to require that doctors reimplant ectopic pregnancies. That can't be done, an ectopic pregnancy is already dead, but an ignorant man wanted to make it a law. Luckily it didn't pass. Mike Pence just said women should have to continue to carry nonviable fetuses. That means women would risk organ damage, infertility and death for a baby that has already, or will soon, die. The aforementioned ectopic pregnancy will cause a woman to die an agonizing death if not terminated. A woman is a living being with hopes, dreams, rights, friends and family. She has a right to live. She has a right to control whether she risks her life to bring life into the world. Like many men, you seem to identify with the fetus rather than the woman. It's not a person yet. Whether it ever becomes a person should be the mother's decision. A woman recently testified in a lawsuit against Texas that she had a very wanted pregnancy in which the baby had no brain. They made her carry it until she was literally at death's door, causing organ damage and likely making her infertile. As tragic as losing a baby can be, if she'd had a proper abortion, she would have recovered in a few months and could have gone on to try again. Denying the right to abortion will kill women. That is inevitable. It will cause women to suffer unnecessarily. It will cause physical impairments that might never heal. All of that for something that will never, ever be a baby. As for elective abortion, if we had a proper social safety net there would be far fewer abortions, but we don't. Women are not guaranteed healthcare, child care, housing or money for groceries. We have some programs to help some people with those things in some places, but many have cruel means testing and work requirements that cause too many to fall through the cracks and which makes proper childcare impossible if there are no compatible jobs in the neighborhood. Americans simply don't value women, or moms, or kids. If you're going to leave a young mother with no support system, it is wrong to force her to reproduce against her will. Again, it forces suffering on the woman against her will. A being who does not have autonomy over their own body is not free. Abortion has to be a part of a woman's healthcare, just as it has been since the beginning of time. The Goddess is about reverence for both birth and death. A woman's choice is sacred.
A fetus is not a baby. It has no viable brain until 20 weeks.
Why is that if that baby was gestating on Mars, it would be alive and protected, but on Earth it isn't?
The need for a male heir is sort of useless today. With wills and legal document, a girl can inherit everything.
What makes you think a 20 week fetus on Mars would be "alive and protected"? Am I missing something?
A 20 week baby is past the point of an elective abortion. It's as safe here as on Mars. If it dies in utero, or is otherwise non-viable, then the mother would have to abort it. If the Mother's life were at risk, it's more of a dilemma, but nobody carries a baby for five months then arbitrarily decides to abort it. That simply doesn't happen.
I agree about the male heir thing, but it's still very important in certain cultures and religions.
I have been coming around to this very idea and opinion for at least 12 years now and I support females in leadership roles all over our country!
Female power is indeed what is needed throughout our world.
We've had a good run, Mankind. (Not. And not MANkind). I think back to the end of the original "Planet of the Apes," ... and how does it all end for humans? How do we end up destroying ourselves? You remind us that Gaia could easily heal herself -- just shed herself of the stubborn and selfish ones with a pandemic (of course the weak get swept in, too. And the caring and selfless. Not all of the really rich and greedy, alas). For the overly zealous, uptight, religious patriarchs -- is there any self-preservational reason that nature (or god for that matter) would increase the numbers of the sexually nonbinary in humans? Maybe to slow down our over-population? Sometimes, the simplest theory is the right answer -- humans are just too complicated to survive. Good riddance. It amazes me how there are anti-science pilots who somehow manage to keep their planes in the air. We've made it too easy, no? I appreciate you trying to find the answers, Morgaine, but is there even a way to show humans their folly without them learning "the hard way?" Oh, I see. If we can just take the power away from the worst ones... which may be us. Peace, Morgaine,... somehow. Hey! Which brings me to your original mission statement. Weren't you going to write about health and well-being topics, too? I could be mistaken, and not as urgent... but it may give you rest at 3:00 AM.
Yes! I need to work on some articles about Keto and the Standard American Diet! I've had a lot going on so my writing has been mostly reactive, but I'll make an effort to get to that because it is far more important with the current prices for insulin.
Standing ovation!!
Thank you so much. FYI, I added a big section at the beginning since you read it.