Wednesday, 25 February 2009


The First Conspiracy Was Against Women
Part 2 Why Men Cannot Run the Family or World

Again I come to you my followers from the Throne of Mother God, bringing the message of why men cannot run the family or the world, and it is really very simple. No tests, no studies need be made here, just common sense, although it can all be corroborated by studies, tests and statistics.

Men do not have a maternal instinct. Why not? And what does it mean? How does it impact his ability to run family and world?

A woman has built into her, whatever her personality type, breeding or education, an instinct to take care of children. This means she is equipped, facilitated, and empowered to do so. Over millennia she developed and evolved the necessary skills to take care of people for the survival of the human race.

The male, a truncated version of the female, is no more than an adjunct to the female; he is not her superior or even equal, he is a grown up version of one of the kids, wholly dependent on her emotionally and physically. I say physically advisedly; there is not the slightest doubt that when a male is sick or injured that a woman will take care of him – but let a woman fall upon hard times she will be neglected and abandoned by ‘her man’ for he is but a child, not a responsible vehicle She better hope she has some sisters to take care of her in time of need. I cannot tell you how many times males have hit upon me when their wife was in the hospital, in the thought,
‘She is in the hospital, let’s get it on.’ Males work by instinct, their instinct tells them to forever seek more women – there is nothing wrong with this under the right circumstances for women also seek many males – except with women this is tempered by the situation; that if children or the disabled need to be taken care of, she will see to it first.

So there you have the split in the instinct. For male, it is
‘inseminate as many women as possible, and prevent other males from doing so,’

and for female (this might surprise you, but I have studies on this),

‘have sex with as many men as possible, and take care of those who need caring, children, the sick, the old and disabled.’

Now to be the caretaker of children (and others who are in need) requires PATIENCE, EMPATHY, COMPASSION, UNDERSTANDING and FORGIVENESS. These qualities of which I speak have to do with relationships, not technical, mathematical or intellectual skills – (in which males can be geniuses even more so than women, as some of them spend much time studying while women are caring for other people).

Now studies and observation show that males fall short in human relationships regarding those virtues just mentioned. MALES CANNOT MANAGE STRESS THE WAY THAT WOMEN CAN. Just take note, why are males NOT teaching kindergarten and grade school, why are they NOT eager to be baby sitters unless they want to abuse children, and why do they NOT enjoy caring for the sick? One reason could be that these jobs pay little and they do not like volunteer work that requires sacrifice or charity (they feel they are above this, that they should be paid well for all they do). However, these jobs probably pay little because they are routinely handled by women and women’s work is devalued – so the reason is that males do not like to do work that entails EMOTIONAL STRESS. Care for the needy IS ALWAYS STRESSFUL – children are needy – the sick are needy – the very old are needy – animals are needy when in captivity. The needy require the virtues held strongly by women and badly represented by men.

What happens in the care of a child that women rise to but men do not? - Extreme PATIENCE. Can a male watch a child make a mistake, over and over again, without getting impatient or mad? Can a male speak to a small child in a soothing, gentle voice? Or do males run roughshod over little children in their way of speaking and acting? Males are crude, they get angry quickly, they want to strike out at those who falter or fail – they are the worst of caretakers. If they are not abusive, they are neglectful; they do not imagine the mind set of a child or what it needs.

When a woman hears someone crying or screaming, she gathers herself toward their need, but men are so stressed out by this behavior they want to escape. A woman knows that crying, screaming are someone calling for help, and she tries to figure out what help is needed and supplies it. A man will put on his hat and exit out the door.

When a child needs to be toilet or potty trained, I cannot imagine a man taking this on. They just don’t have the instinct or patience. They want to bark orders to children the way a sergeant does to recruits; they feel that force is needed to make others obey and they terrorize children instead of guiding them. Children need gentleness, encouragement – qualities in short supply by males.

A mother tolerates bad behavior in a child, even mischief, even crimes, because she has ‘unconditional’ love, which means she forgives over and over again when a person errs. She tries to see it from their point of view, that something is wrong that needs to be corrected; she tries to figure out how to help. Males think in terms of discipline and punishment rather than rehabilitation or gentle correction. Males should never be given responsibility over children or even left alone with children or anyone who is weak and helpless. Granted, not all are abusers, but the statistics are so staggering that it is better not to take a chance. Even those who are not abusers could be neglectors, just simply haven’t got the ability to nurture.

When women see the weak, the needy and helpless, they have empathy and compassion, males do not. Males see these types as problems they should eliminate or avoid, they do not see themselves as serving others.

Males simply do not have maternal capacity; caring for others. Why then, could it be expected that they should be the heads of households? This has been a delusion and a major lie perpetrated on humanity. Males devised the ‘nuclear family’ which means THAT WOMEN ARE SEPARATED FROM OTHER WOMEN, FROM THEIR KINFOLK WHO WOULD LEND A HAND TO NURTURE AND PROTECT CHILDREN, AND WHERE WOMEN THEMSELVES ARE PROTECTED FROM MALES.

Not only are children and women protected from male abuse by their kinfolk, but they also share medical, psychological and practical knowledge needed to manage life. When males created the ISOLATED family with man at the head, they did it to disempower women and place them at the mercy of males and the male system of ‘social services.’ So now instead of women working out their family problems among themselves, you have Patriarchal agencies, with too many male employees, Nazi doctors and psychologists, taking over from the Matriarchal women – to take authority away from the be continued
From ‘The Fall of Mankind’

Or Will He Make New Home Out Of His Desert And Yours Too?

Throughout history, up to the 1960's; the percentage of males amongst high school grads was always in the 40's or 30's. That's true all the way back to the 1870's, which is the earliest time there are records for.

By 1960, it was hovering around the mid 40's.

Then it started to rise in the 1960's to all-time highs: from 45% to nearly 49% by 1970. It stayed in the upper 40's to lower 50's until 1999 ... before plunging back down to 45% the following year.

What happened to equalize male and female high school graduates in the US for the first time ever, throughout the 1960's, was – to put it simply – Sputnik. Many of you were there. You saw how big an impact it had on the US, completely changing its direction and sharpening its focus for the following 10 years.

The implicit promise of the striving throughout the 1960's and the accomplishment in 1969 was of a new era of exploration, colonization and settlement with the rise of a new spacefaring civilization, hence the term "Space Age". This is what finally gave men something to live and strive for once again in this world – which (as World War II made perfectly obvious) had become all too cooped up with no place new or unknown left to go, explore or conquer. It's what motivated men, once again, to excel.

To a boy born and raised during the 1960's, he would have lived in that time thinking this new progress was the norm. So the contrast between then and the pathetic apathy of the American people of the 1970's with regard to that venture and promise was all the more stark and all the easier to see for someone like him. The disingenuous language that followed "we don't really have any reason to go out there, or any need; let machines do it, instead" and the feigned amnesia of the prior 10 years was nothing short of insulting.

How many lives were risked and lost over those years, just for the sake of retreating back to the safety and comfort of home and the familiar? And how many were lost in the name of a program and vehicle (the Shuttle) that doesn’t even leave the exosphere? What kind of progress is that, to go from the small step of reaching the moon to the vaunted heights of near Earth orbit?

That was precisely the cowardice that China embraced 500-700 years ago, when it was on the verge of becoming a major world power – ultimately resulting in its downfall and the indignity of being colonized by smaller, inferior powers: a fate well-deserved for the sin of its xenophobic isolationism. It was perfectly well capable of reaching the New World, as it probably even did, and going further beyond; before it decided to turn inwards and forget about the rest of the world. It even had rocket technology.

Only now is China beginning to atone for this inexcusable sin of its past with the new ambition behind its push outwards to the moon and into space; as well it should. It owes it to itself, and to the rest of the world, to set its past 700 years straight. Finally, the current leaders in China have brought the progeny of this once-great civilization back on track.

Why bother going to school or studying anything, if all you're going to do is live in a world where nobody does anything important anymore? Running around making things better in the world, as opposed to going out of it to new places, is just a futile exercise in spinning your wheels. It's utterly pointless. Sure, you can raise new kids and a new family and make society better. But for what? So that they can grow up and raise new kids who, in turn, grow up and raise yet more kids? That's completely running around in circles.

It's in the nature of men to ever strive outwards. The energy which used to go into these ventures is now being turned in on itself, with dramatic and increasingly catastrophic results. And the process will continue that way as long as the human race chooses to remain cooped up on Earth as a permanently domesticated Earth-bound species. That kind of world where life is just a continuation of the same thing, generation to generation, in the same place, never doing anything new, never seeking out new places to go, is by and large the world envisioned by Toffler in The Third Wave and is the world that is coming to be.

It is a woman's world, and a world made only for women live in, and made only for women to function well in. Ultimately, this is where the increasing disparity amply testified to in the preceding chapters arises from.

If that's the world the human race decides to live in, then half of the human race will become useless baggage. To an increasing degree, this perception will come increasingly into focus and will ultimately be acted on – not out of anger or vengeance, but mercy.

The more ambitious half of the human race will continue to strive ever onwards, pushing the other half further behind in its dust. Like Elizabeth Nickles said in "The Coming Matriarchy" in 1980.

"Whereas women once dominated in the home, they will now open up this domination and attempt to apply it across the board."

New technologies, like ovum-to-ovum fusion, which has already been accomplished for animals, will seal the issue; and the human race and the world, itself, will become either an all-female species or a species with a very large female majority consciously engineered by gender selection.

As well it should.

For given the alternative, of dangerous male energies turned inwards to equally dangerous effect, the world will be better off rid of this male element ... should the human race refuse to embark on its destined course out into the rest of the eternity of outer space and stay cooped up forever on and near Earth.

In a way, the whole world is like a 20 year old man who had an opportunity to receive a tremendous windfall at 18, but passed it up and refused to move out of the house. The analogies are the moon landing; Skylab, which fell from the sky because nobody cared about it; and the promise to go further outwards to lunar colonization, Mars exploration and settlement and eventually out to the stars.

Now he's languishing, sleeping all day, and getting into trouble at night; all the while in the throes of a severe identity crisis over not knowing what to do next, or where to go. Someone needs to push the young man out the door, before he brings the roof to the house down. Or else: just put him out of his misery.

It's time to go.

No comments: