Is Love a Weakness?

Popular culture tells us that it’s alpha people who rule the world. But these alpha types are generally the most, aggressive and deceitful people on the planet. So many are the worse types of people we have, that are ruling our world. It’s why we live in a unfair world of conflict, war, genocide and oppression. So we would be better off is loving people rule our world instead. But there is a common belief that; “love is a weakness.” and there is good reason why people believe this. Loving people will put the needs of others before their own and are not assertive or aggressive with other people. Because of this, some unscrupulous people will take full advantage of loving people and exploit them. Its for this reason, many people assume that loving people are weak, but is this true?

We generally find loving behaviour more in women than in men and there is a evolutionary reason for this. It is known that women have a maternal instinct, where women not only want to give birth to children but also want to care and look after them until they are capable of looking after themselves. We see this behaviour not only in human females but in mammals and birds. The reason for this is that if mothers of many animal species didn’t care for their young, the species they belong to, would go instinct. So even though we assume that love in a weakness, if mothers didn’t have a this powerful instinct to care and look after their children, the human race would die out. But we find that women not only have an instinct to care and nurture their own children but also the children of other mothers. As well as caring for the sick, elderly, animals and men. So in theory we would all be better of if we had maternal minded women rule the world. But unfortunately it’s not as easy as that, as we seem to live in a system where loving people are excluded from power, whether they are male or female. 

So we live in a world where loving people are thought of as weak while selfish and assertive people  are seen as strong. But unfortunately we pay a heavy price for these beliefs because we end up with selfish and ruthless people ruling our world. When we look at history we see its a story of conflict, wars, genocide as well as a huge disparity of wealth between rich and poor. This is because we generally have selfish and uncaring people in positions of power. A ruler who desires to start a war to conquer another country obviously doesn't care about the harm a war will do to the people he is invading. Or even the harm it might do to the people of his own country, if the war goes badly wrong. Likewise, a government who follows policies that greatly benefit only a small ruling elite at the expense of the majority of the population, also clearly doesn’t care about the people they rule. 

This has been the story throughout history and its still true today. Where in the 21st century we still have wars and genocide, as well as a huge gap between rich and poor. So what can we do to change this? And the obvious answer in democratic countries is to vote into power loving politicians who care about the people they rule. But off course there are big problems in trying to do this. It is claimed that the USA has; “the best democracy that money can buy.” Unfortunately this is not only true of the USA but in all Western democratic countries, where corruption in politics is commonplace. So even if the voters, voted for a politician who genuinely cares about people. He or she will be side-lined from any position of power by the majority of corrupt politicians. Who don’t want anyone upsetting their gravy train.

A politician that did work out that people do want caring and loving people in positions of power was Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand. She campaigned on the basis that she was a genuinely caring person and through this became Prime Minster. But once she was in power, she proved to be a normal, lying, scheming, two-faced politician. Who never intended to keep her election promises and did the opposite to what she said she would do. This made her so unpopular with the people, that her own party had to get rid of her before the next election. But this does prove that people do want to be ruled by loving and caring people, but what prevents this from happening, is corruption. 

The point is that if we were able to get rid of corruption, and had a political party who did campaign on the basis they are genuine loving people who would care about the people they rule. And then when they got into power, kept all their election promises. So they ruled for the benefit of the majority of people and not for the benefit of the billionaire class. Then in every election the people would always vote for a party like this. So if politicians did do this, then love becomes a strength and not a weakness. 

But of course getting rid of corruption is not easy, but it has been recognized world-wide that corruption is what destroys all countries. For instance we have seen over the last 50 years the decline in power of all Western counties. The main reason for this that at the beginning of 1980s Western countries started the policy of, “deregulation”. Where it was claimed that too many regulations stifled business. But what they didn’t point out was that these regulations were there to prevent corruption. So by getting rid of these laws has allowed corruption to thrive, until it took over the whole political system of the Western world. Bringing about the decline, in the power of Western democracies. Why corruption is destroying Western countries is that wealthy entrepreneurs no longer invest their money into manufacturing. Because they can make far more money in, insider trading, share buybacks and other dodgy money-making schemes. So the manufacturing base of Western countries has declined through neglect and has gone East. 

Meanwhile the government of China recognized that it was corruption that was hampering the grown of their economy. So they started a campaign to stamp out corruption, to the degree where anyone found guilty of corruption can get life imprisonment or are executed. Not even billionaires are immune from this. China has executed 14 yuan billionaires between 2003 and 2011 on corruption charges and other crimes. This would never happen in Western countries where billionaires are above the law and can literately get away with murder. It is the anti-corruption drive that is one of the main reasons for China’s growth and prosperity. Because in China for anyone to bribe a government official is seen as a capital offence resulting in life imprisonment or the death penalty. While in Western countries it’s seen as normal business. 

Which means that if Western governments fail to address the corruption problem, then the decline of all Western countries will continue. So if we look at it in the long term, countries that stamp out corruption will always be more successful than countries that allow it to continue and flourish. China is able to stamp out corruption because it’s a dictatorship and its government saw the billionaire class as a threat to their power. The trouble is with this, is that this doesn’t guarantee that a future Chinese government will think the same way. A future Chinese leader might not understand the dangers of corruption and allow it to thrive bringing ruin to his country. Then unfortunately the people won’t be able to do anything about it because China is a dictatorship. Although it has to be said this can happen in a democracy, like we saw at the beginning of the 1980s. Where the disastrous policies like; deregulation and “trickle-down economics” were adopted. Which greatly benefited the wealthy at the expense of the common people and caused the decline in Western manufacturing.

So we can see clearly that corruption will lead to the total disintegration of Western countries which will in time force them to change the way they govern themselves. In that time of change, we have to stick to what works and understand what doesn’t work. So the number one item on this list will be to stamp out corruption. Then create a system where honest, loving people get into positions of power. This can only be guaranteed in a democracy. Some people have claim that the best type of government is a benevolent dictatorship. Which in theory, sounds like a good idea, but no one can explain how to ensure we get benevolent people in positions of power. This is why we need democracy because even though it can be subverted by corruption. Its still a method where the common people will have some say in how they are governed. 

So to achieve a better form of government we need three things: A democratic system, then to have a type of constitution where all forms of corruption are stamped out. Then finally a willingness of voters to vote into power honest, decent politicians who care about the people they rule. It’s true that there will be other Jacinda Ardern type politicians, who claim to be loving and caring people but are in truth just lying, two-faced politicians. But in a system that stamps out corruption, then this type of politician cannot thrive and will be soon be found out. 

In mainstream politics, people debate which is the best political system. So some people might advocate capitalism while others will advocate communism. But to me its more; “the singer not the song.” Whatever system we have, if the rulers are corrupt, stupid or even insane, they will destroy the country they are ruling. While intelligent, competent and caring rulers will ensure the country thrives and the people enjoy a high standard of living. We can see this in recent history, in the time of the Soviet Union the Capitalist system of Western countries worked better than the Soviet communist system which finally collapsed in 1990. But in the 21st century we are finding that the Chinese communist system is working better than Capitalist system of Western countries. It’s claimed that the reason for this is that, Chinese rulers are very pragmatic and are more interested in what works and doesn’t work. While Western rulers are blinded by ideology. A less than charitable reason is that it’s also claimed that; “China is ruled by engineers and scientists, while the West is ruled by lawyers and clowns.” 

So clearly the type of rulers we have, is far more important than the political system they use. This is why we need to get rid of the idea that, “love is a weakness” and instead realise that we want loving, caring and competent people ruling our world and do everything we can, to ensure that this happens. 

Another Funny Cat Video!

Dolly Parton - "9 to 5"

One of Rasa's favorite songs by one of her favorite singers, the late Dolly Parton.  She passed away less than three months after Rasa herself did.

Rest in peace, Dolly Parton!

How is it Possible for Women to Rule the World?

 Since the 1980s I have been advocating both matriarchy and that God is a woman. But thinking about it these two concepts are in contradiction with each other. Because if God is female then why are we living in a patriarchal world? Surely a female God would ensure that it’s women who rule the world and not men. We can only understand this contradiction by realising that we are first and foremost spiritual beings. So life on Earth, in our material bodies, is only a small part of our existence. As I have written in my new book, Mother God Hypothesis, the purpose of living our on planet is to learn love. Where women are the teachers and teach men how to love. 

So if the spiritual purpose of women is to teach men how to love. Then surely it would be easier for women to do this if women ruled the world? That’s true, but both men and women also have to be tested to truly know if we understood how to love. So the way to do this, is in a patriarchal society where men have responsibility for ruling the world and see how they will rule when they are in-charge. But when women released the reigns of power and allowed men to rule our world it went badly wrong from the beginning. Scientists using DNA evidence has shown that about 7000 years ago in Europe and the Middle East 95% of all men were killed but not women. It seems that 7000 years ago men fought such savage wars, the majority of men died in this violence. This has been supported also by archaeology where mass graves of men have been discovered by archaeologists, where all the men showed signs of a violent death. 

This was theorised in 1950s and 60s by the archaeologist Marija Gimbutas who claimed that peaceful Goddess cultures were conquered by people she called the Kurgan. At the time this theory was strongly disputed but in more recent times, DNA evidence have supported her theories. Although nowadays they call the Kurgan people the Yamnaya. A good video explaining this is called; Ancient Civilizations: The Goddess vs. The Yamnaya.

So the switch from matriarchy to patriarchy got off to a very bad start. But Mother God is forgiving, tolerant and understanding and so men were allowed to continue to rule. And to their credit they did manage to curb their extreme violence and somehow create societies without murdering each other. Although wars and genocide did continue as well as slavery and the oppression of women. Unfortunately this has been the story of patriarchy ever since. Although it has to be admitted things have slowly changed for the better. For instance, back in Roman times gladiators were forced to fight each other to the death for the sole purpose of entertaining Roman spectators. There is no place on our planet today, where this would be tolerated or accepted. So everything is slowly changing for the better, like we see in the 19th century, where both slavery and serfdom were both abolished. But wars and even genocide are still happening today in the 21st century. 

But patriarchy hasn’t only just been a test of love for men, it also at test for women as well. Teaching love to men in a matriarchal society would have been a lot easier for women, because they would have the status and authority to do this. It is far more difficult for women to do this in any patriarchal society because women would be teaching men love from the position of being a second class citizen. Because of this, many women have found this so difficult that they have ended up being taught by men that; “love is a weakness”. So many women have learnt from men, how not to love and even how to hate. 

In spite of the progress men have made in becoming more loving people compared with what they were like thousands of years ago. There are signs that MotherGod has decided to bring this test to an end we can see this in the rise of feminism. This started back in the 18th century with the book; “A Vindication of the Rights of Woman” by Mary Wollstonecraft. Since then feminism has grown so that in the 20th century, there has been large numbers of countries throughout the word which has given equal rights to women. So will this lead to a matriarchal world? It might happen but at present one of the biggest opponents of matriarchy are feminists. Feminism has been very successful by promoting the concept of sexual equality. So they see matriarchy as being the flip side of patriarchy where women oppress men in much the same way as men have oppressed women. For this reason many feminists oppose matriarchy as strongly as they oppose patriarchy, because matriarchy undermines their argument for sexual equality. 

If that’s the case, how can matriarchy succeed if it’s being opposed by patriarchal men and feminist women? The only community I know who want matriarchy and women to rule the world, is the femdom community but they promote feminists worse fears. They have fantasies of cruel women who use men like abused slaves. So this form of matriarchy wouldn’t work, because the spiritual purpose of women is to teach men how to love. But perhaps we won’t need a matriarchal movement like feminism to bring about matriarchy, it might just happen spontaneously. How this could happen we can see women’s academic performance. I looked this up on the internet and this is what I got. 

Grade Performance: Meta-analyses confirm that girls earn higher grades than boys in all major subjects, including mathematics and science, with the gap being largest in language courses and smallest in STEM fields. 

Educational Attainment: Women began earning more college degrees than men in the mid-1980s and continue to dominate enrollment; in 2018, 57% of students in U.S. degree-granting institutions were female. 

Subject-Specific Nuances: While women generally achieve higher grades, men may still score higher on standardized math and science tests, though recent research indicates negligible gender differences in actual mathematical ability. 

Graduation Rates: Women have higher graduation rates in every U.S. state, with female graduation rates exceeding 70% in 16 states compared to only two states for men.

So it seems that feminist activism in pushing for equality in academia, has resulted in women outperforming men. So in theory this should result in women taking over and ruling our world, but this hasn’t happened yet. The reason is that women have a couple of more hurdles to jump over, to do this. The main one is childbirth. Many career minded women end up having to choose between having a career or having children. This is less of a problem for women from wealthy families as she can hire a nanny to look after her children, but is a big problem for women who can’t afford to do that. As the result, the birth rate in countries where there is sexual equality has dramatically decreased. While in countries and cultures where women are still oppressed by men, so women are not encouraged to have a career, the birth rate still continues to rise. 

The second problem is that too many women now believe what men taught them, that “love is a weakness”. So many feminist women in trying to be equal to men believe that have to act and behave like men to gain power, wealth and status. The result has been that although we have seen an increase in the number of female politicians, all of them are as dishonest, crooked and duplicitous as the average male politician. So for the general public there is no advantage in voting for a female politician because she will probably be as corrupt as a male politician. 

The only way women can progress to matriarchy is to ditch feminism, even though it has served them so well, for more than the last two hundred years. So can feminism accept that men and women are very different? We see this already with trans women row, where biological men have tried to muscle into female sports by claiming they are women. This could have been the death of female sport if some brave sportswomen hadn’t had spoken up. This has resulted in women having to accept that men and women are biologically different, as men’s greater size and strength does give men a decisive advantage in nearly all sports. So if women can accept this, they then can accept how difference men and women are different, in so many other ways. Like we see in women’s academic achievements where women outperform men. Not that this is anything new, it has been written about in the 20th century in books like: The Natural Superiority of Women, by Ashley Montagu; Brain Sex, by Ann Moir and David Jessel and Men Are from Mars, Women Are from Venus, by John Gray. 

Feminist hated books like this because it undermines their argument that men and women are the same. But science does support everything these authors say about the difference between men and women. Two hundred years ago Mary Wollstonecraft made the argument that men and women are the same because sexist men at that time made claims that men ruled the world because they were more intelligent than women. Or that women were,”too emotional” to makes sensible decisions. (“Sensible” decisions like starting wars). But feminists have already won Mary Wollstonecraft’s argument for her. Academic women have proven that men are not more intelligent than women and are able to make sensible decisions. Very few men, (outside of Islam) would today dare publicly claim that men are more intelligent than women, like they did in the 18th and 19th centuries. So matriarchy is not as big a threat to women’s empowerment, as feminist believe it to be. 

So it should be possible to have a matriarchal political party which claims that it women would make better rulers than men if they act and behave like women and not try to imitate men. So women in a matriarchal party should make it clear that women have maternal and nurturing instincts and it’s natural for women to love and care for others. So they will follow their strongest instincts and care about the people they rule. Which means they will be not be corrupt and so won’t accept bribes from billionaires, large corporations or anyone else. But doing this they will demonstrate that love is a strength and not a weakness. 

The point is that the public are fed up with lying and corrupt politicians and will vote for any politician who tells the truth and does what she says she will do. So straight away we can see that a matriarchal party of real women who do follow their maternal instincts have a big advantage. It has been shown that a political platform like this can work. Jacinda Ardern used it to became Prime Minster of New Zealand. But as it turned out she proved to be a normal lying and corrupt politician who had no intention of keeping her election promises. So she quickly became very unpopular and was forced to resign. So this means that any Matriarchal political party not only has to tell the public they are caring and loving women, they have to put it into practise and keep their promises. When they get into power. Or they to will be vote out of power in the next election. Also, once there is one successful matriarchal government somewhere in the world. It will encourage people of other countries to try to do the same thing. 

It is well known that corruption is the main cause of decline of any country. For instance in China they are so frightened of corruption, that they have executed government officials who accept bribes. It is the main reason why the western countries are declining. Back in the early 1980s the Regan government proposed the idea of “deregulation”, claiming that too much regulation was hampering business dealings. Other western countries also adopted the same idea. What was not explained was that these regulations were there to try to prevent corruption. So when the regulations  were abolished, corruption in all Western countries went unchecked. So the Chinese economy who is doing it’s best to limit corruption is growing, while Western countries where corruption is rampant, is declining. This means that a matriarchal government who is serious about caring for the people and won’t accept bribes from anyone, will prosper and give their people a better standard of living. So once a matriarchal government gets into power, providing the women follow their maternal instincts, they will continue to rule as long as they like. 

Amazon.com

Blog

My Matriarchal Journey

 Back at the end of the 1980s I wrote a book with the help of my friend Pamela Suffield a book called “Gospel of the Goddess”. We wrote as a New Age book but soon found out most New Agers were not interested in it. Not even women into Goddess spirituality. The only people who liked our book was the Femdom community who then contacted us. Pamela soon lost interest in this but I continued to communicate with them, but soon discovered a problem. 

In our book “Gospel of the Goddess” we not only claimed that God was a women we also suggested that women should rule the world. Which is what the femdom community liked. But we claimed that the reason why women should rule the world, is that women are far more caring and loving people than men. This was totally different to femdom fantasies which wanted women to not only be the dominant sex but to be cruel and sadistic as well. So I had problems with dealing with that. But because I kept in communication with the femdom community “Gospel of the Goddess” did get published in New York by Artemis Creations Publishing. Although it didn’t sell very well. 

I then got in contact with a women who called herself Goddess Dianna Vesta and I got on well with her. She encouraged me to go onto the internet and to me she came across to me as a very nice person yet she was pedaling Femdom fantasies, where women were very cruel to men. Then I came in contact with Rasa Von Werder and she was willing to promote my ideas about matriarchy and why God is a woman but she had no interest in femdom which made things a lot easier for me. At about the same time Dianna Vesta dropped out. So I continued working with Rasa Von Werder but I still found the biggest support for matriarchy and the idea that God is a woman, still came from the femdom community. 

But the problem both Rasa and I had was that in selling the concept that women should rule the world, because they are kinder people than men, didn’t fit in with the behaviour of female politicians. If we look at well known female politicians like Indira Gandhi, Margaret Thatcher, Angela Merkel and Hillary Clinton none of them demonstrated the caring and loving side of women. All of them proved to be as ruthless, corrupt and deceptive as any normal male politicians. The main reason for this is that women are told that, “love is a weakness”. So ambitious women are encouraged to suppress any maternal or nurturing instincts they have, if they want to succeed in the brutal world of patriarchal politics. 

The second problem we both had was that there was another matriarchal group called Matriarchal Studies. This was a academic matriarchal group that although believed in matriarchy they claimed that matriarchy was all about sexual equality. It wasn’t about women ruling the world. As the result when Rasa attempted to contact these women she was strongly rejected. But it seems to me that their form of matriarchy is not matriarchy but feminism. I would agree that a community ruled by women is far more likely to be more equal than any patriarchal society. But surely matriarchal is in the end, female rule. If we had a egalitarian society ruled both by men and women, men would compete against women for power and women would in the end have to act and behave like male politicians or lose power. Which is the situation we have today, where female politicians have to suppress any loving feelings they have, if they want political power.

A third problem we had, was that the only argument we has for claiming that God was a woman was that Jesus claimed that God is a God of love. So it would then make far more sense that a loving God would be female rather than male. The big problem with that, is that as atheists point out that; “if God is a God of love then, then why do we live in a world of suffering?” Which is a difficult problem to answer, not only for us, but for all Christians. 

Then a couple of years ago I read about the ancient Greek legend of how the Greek Goddess Gaia come into being when she emerged out of chaos. At first I just saw this as just an alternative explanation to how the universe began, but the more I thought about it I began to realise that it explained so much more. At it explains why God is female and why a loving God would create a world of suffering like we now live in. You  can read a full explanation of this in my book; Mother God Hypothesis. Or in my previous article.

From this I learnt that men are here on this planet to learn how to love and women are their teachers. But unfortunately men also teach women to reject love as they claim it’s a weakness and even teach women how to hate. This then is why we need a religion the explains why God is female and why we need to live in a matriarchal society. So men can learn to except that women are their teachers in teaching them how to love and stop them from teaching women the opposite to this.

Amazon.com

Blog

Why God is a Woman

 For anyone who asks questions like; “why are we here?”, or “what is the purpose and meaning of life?” Then the whole world is a mystery. It’s even more of a problem if you’re also interested in cosmology, because then you also ask; “where do we come from?” which is also a very difficult question. This question has occupied the minds of philosophers throughout history and no one can give a undisputed answer to this question. 

In the past there was two answers to this question. Many religions claimed that, a God created the world. But that is disputed by atheists and secularists who then ask; “who or what created God?” and religions have no answer to this question. But atheists or secularists didn’t have a satisfactory answer to how the world was created either. All they could do was claim the world is eternal, so it never had a beginning. Which is a mind boggling concept. But then at the beginning of the 20th century scientists came up with a much better and more acceptable way our universe was created, in what came to be known as the Big Bang Theory. 

As 20th century technology began to produce bigger and better telescopes, astronomers began to obtain a clearer understanding of the size and nature of the whole universe. And through this they began to notice that galaxies seem to be flying apart from each other. So some astronomers, like Edwin Hubble then asked the question, “what would happen if we go back in time when these galaxies were closer together?”. From this came the calculation that 13.8 billion years ago the whole universe was a single clump of matter. From this came the Big Bang Theory which claimed the whole universe exploded out of nothing. 

How a universe was able to explode out of nothing is never satisfactory explained, but for many people it is a far better explanation than any idea that a God created the universe, or that we live in an eternal universe. But it is claimed that; science is indifferent to any personal bias or anything we wish to believe. So although the foundation of the Big Bang Theory is built on science, but then science then began to dismantle and destroy this theory through what is known as the fine-tuned universe hypothesis. 

In 1961, the physicist Robert H. Dicke pointed out that gravity and electromagnetism, must be perfectly fine-tuned for life to exist in the universe. Then astronomer Fred Hoyle took this concept even further and in his 1983 book, “The Intelligent Universe”. Where he pointed out many other ways our universe is fine-tuned. Unfortunately most of the general public is unaware of this because you need to be a scientist to properly understand the fine-tuned universe hypothesis. For instant there is the Cosmological Constant. Which is the energy density of the vacuum which must balance with extraordinary precision. If it was to differed by just one part in 10^50, the universe would either expand too fast for galaxies to form, or it would collapse catastrophically. (10^50 is 10 with 50 zeros. A trillion has only 12 zeros, so 10^50 is an extremely higher number.)

The main forces known to science is gravity, electromagnetism, the strong Nuclear Force and the weak Nuclear Force. Again it was discovered that all these forces are so finely balanced that if any of these forces was not exactly right, then atoms could not be created. So the fundamental building blocks of matter could not exist without all these forces being so finely tuned. This then undermined the Big Bang Theory because how did universe became so finely tuned when it exploded out of nothing? The Noble prize physicist Sir Roger Penrose calculated that this would be so unlikely that it is 1 in 10^10^123 for us to live in the stable universe we live in. This is a number so high that it is even much more than the estimated number of atoms in the observable universe. It would be even more unlikely if you created a huge explosion inside a rock formation and the debris from the explosion came down and formed into a circle of perfectly formed houses made of stone. But the Big Bang Theory is also coming under attack from the findings of the new James Webb space telescope. Because what this telescope is discovering about our universe, does not fit with the claims and calculations of the Big Bang Theory. 

The problem is for atheistic and secular scientists is that the fine-tuned universe hypothesis seem to strongly suggest that a great intelligence created our world. This seems to prove that a God created the world after all. But if that’s true it still doesn’t answer the question, “who or what created God?”

But then many people would claim that this is an unknowable question. But recently I discovered the answer to this question was hidden in ancient myths. I was looking on-line about the ancient Greek Goddess Gaia where I learnt that the Ancient Greeks called her “The Mother of Everything” and she emerged spontaneously from Chaos. She then created all other gods, mortals and the whole world. 

This is very similar to how atheist scientists claimed that life emerged on our planet from something they call; Abiogenesis. Where in primordial soup the right chemicals in the right conditions came together to form the first spark of life. (Although no scientist up until now, has been able to produce life from non-living matter.) There is also the Infinite Monkey Theorem which is a thought experiment by the French mathematician Émile Borel. He claimed monkeys hitting typewriter keys at random would over time write the whole works of Shakespeare. So could this be how Gaia spontaneously emerged from Chaos? 

So it suggests we do live in a infinite universe, but it was at one time a sea of chaos. But in that chaos there would be infinite possibilities. So over infinite time and space there would be a chance formation of energy that would create the first intelligence. But if this is true, then this first intelligence would have to be feminine. The reason for this is that a masculine intelligence would fight and compete against the surrounding chaos. Which would only create more chaos and so a masculine intelligence would end up drowning in the chaos it was fighting against. Whereas a feminine intelligence would do her best to work with the surrounding chaos and try to create order from it. And so by doing this she would become larger and stronger. So it does suggest that in time, it was she that created the stable and orderly universe we now live in. 

This then suggests that the sea of chaos is represented by the masculine because the masculine represents aggression, competition, conflict, fighting, war which finally leads to chaos. Whereas the feminine is all about love, caring, order and nurturing which leads to harmony. So it would be a feminine God that would create the fine-tuned universe. But if that’s the case, why do we have men representing the masculine which leads chaos, living on the same planet as women? Because women represents the feminine which tries to create love, order and harmony around her. The reason might be that a planet of only men, would in time destroy each other in violence and war. So you need women to prevent men from doing this. But women pay a heavy price for trying to save men because they have been abused, assaulted, murdered and oppressed by men throughout history. 

So why would a Female God allow women to come to a planet like ours to be so badly ill treated by men? The answer to this question is that women are spiritual teachers and attempt to teach men how to love. Unfortunately many men resist this, as they think “love in a weakness” not understanding that love in the most powerful force in the universe, because unconditional love unite us all in oneness, which is what God is. So instead men try to teach women that love is weak and even go as far as to teach women how to hate. We even see this is the Christian religion where Jesus tried to teach men how to love, but his teachings are still ignored by many Christians who instead judge and condemn others. 

I would need a book to explain it all, which I have written in my book, “Mother God Hypothesis.”

 

Amazon.com

Blog

Another Great Cute Animal Video!