Channel: A.S.
My dearest brothers and sisters,
This is Tunia speaking. I love you so very much.
Last week, in the message titled “female supremacism, part 1 of 4”, I argued that your society is female supremacist. If you missed it, you can find it at https://eraoflight.com/2025/06/29/tunia-female-supremacism-part-1-of-4
In summary, I said that the following is textbook white supremacism:
“white people are better in a dozen ways than black people. Black people are better in no way except for some purely physical things.”
And I showed that your society says the following:
“women are better in a dozen ways than men. Men are better in no way except for some purely physical things.”
Therefore your society is female supremacist.
Okay, so saying “women are better in a dozen ways than men. Men are better in no way except for some purely physical things” is female supremacism. Then what should we say instead?
Well logically speaking there are three alternative options that we can use if we don’t want to be female supremacist. We’ll look at each of them in turn:
Option one: even if you zoom in on specific areas, there isn’t a single area in which either men or women are better than the other
This option doesn’t work because it’s not true, and also deep down no one believes it’s true.
Even people who claim to believe this, don’t actually believe it deep down.
At most, this option is a kind of double-think idea that lives in some people’s minds while at the same time they believe that women are better in some ways.
So basically, the people who claim to believe this really believe “both genders are equal, but one is more equal than the other.”
Specifically, here’s an incomplete list of ways in which women are better than men:
No one actually believes that women are just as likely to rape and commit violent crime as men are.
No one actually believes that very small children need their father just as much as they need their mother.
No one actually believes that women are just as likely as men to take stupid, pointless risks.
Women are also clearly better at reading people and at being focused on caretaking.
Women are more concerned with people, are more in tune with their emotions and are less likely to use cold, psychopathic, inhumane logic.
As caretaking-focused people, women are more keenly aware that a society isn’t that great if it has good GDP numbers and good stock market performance, but most people are getting crushed economically.
(Admittedly at your current level of consciousness there isn’t a system that works well and isn’t horrible. The solution is collectively raising your consciousness, and then non-coercive politics starts working. Still, women are right to point out that a society with billionaires and beggars is horrifying and dystopian.)
Women are also more spiritually talented in general, although it depends on the specific kind of spirituality. For example, women are better at being mediums, but aren’t better at the very rational, scholarly parts of spirituality. Still, in general women are more talented spiritually.
Women’s greater spiritual talent isn’t a minor point. It is going to become more and more important in the future, as Earth opens up.
Women are also better at using sexual energy — not just to create babies, but women can also do impressive magick or great lightwork or achieve great spiritual growth or heal through sex. Men can also do that, but not to the same degree.
If a pupil spends a week with a female spiritual teacher who is willing and skilled at using sex to help her pupil grow spiritually, then that pupil would grow an unbelievable amount from that. Of course women don’t have to do that, but this is an ability that women have.
Why do you think the dark controllers have always sought to control female sexuality?
Female sexuality is a superpower.
Personally I like sex, and talk about it relatively often, for more reasons than just hedonism.
You think connection and pleasure is all that I accomplish in the bedroom?
Returning to the main topic: another way in which women are better is that they’re less likely to have sex with their subordinates.
Arguably women are more love-oriented.
Arguably women are more concerned with protecting and not destroying nature.
This is not a complete list.
But it’s very clear that no one actually believes that women aren’t better in any way than men are. See the previous list.
Everyone knows that women are better in some ways than men are.
So this first option doesn’t work. Let’s look at the other two options.
Option two: women are better in certain substantial ways, and men are better in certain minor ways
Option two correctly acknowledges that women are better in some substantial ways than men (see the previous list). And it tries to balance that out by saying that men are better in some minor ways. So let’s say, we acknowledge that men are physically stronger and better at doing handymen and repair work (because they’re more object-focused) and men have slightly better spatial reasoning.
One problem with this is that if we’d say “white people are better in lots of substantial ways, while black people are good as handymen and as athletes”… well that still sounds like horrendous white supremacism, right? Which means that this second option is still female supremacy.
Moreover, assume you have two equally qualified candidates for a CEO position. And your worldview is that men are physically stronger and are good handymen and have better spatial reasoning (all irrelevant for a CEO position), while women are better in several ways, such as being better at reading people (relevant) and being less likely to have sex with a subordinate (relevant) and being less likely to take stupid pointless risks (very relevant).
Okay, so then it would be rational for you to quietly discriminate against the man and hire the woman, just because she’s a woman. It may even be rational for you to hire a slightly less qualified woman if this is how you look at the world.
Similarly, if women are just generally better except for a few small details, then as a society it makes economic sense to have women-only scholarships while already more women attend university. Even though that’s clearly discriminatory. Why? Because we believe that women are overall better, so we want higher positions to be mostly filled with women.
Frankly, under this option two it’s rational to discriminate against men.
Also, if Western couples undergo in vitro fertilisation and they’re legally allowed to choose the sex of the embryo, then they tend to choose girls nowadays.
And why not? If women have substantial advantages, and men are only stronger and better at being handymen and better at spatial reasoning, then why wouldn’t you want a daughter rather than a son? It sounds horrible, but it’s rational behavior if you think that women are better in substantial ways while men are only better in minor ways.
Another issue here is that even if we look at one of the few areas in which men are better according to this option, people still aren’t willing to accept that men are actually better in those few areas.
For example, while your society is willing to acknowledge that men are more object-oriented, they’re not willing to acknowledge that men in general are better handymen. “Judge the individual”, they say, while also saying that women are better in 50 ways than men (as we discussed last week).
As another example, we said that men have better spatial ability. So are people willing to say that men are better drivers? No, they’re not.
Typically you’ll hear that men might have better spatial reasoning, but women are just more responsible overall and less likely to take stupid risks, and therefore women are at least as good drivers as men.
But then option two boils down to “women have general advantages that help them with everything, and men have a few minor advantages like spatial reasoning that only help them in specific situations, and even in those specific situations women may be at least as good as men due to women’s general advantages.”
Or more concisely: “women are better at almost everything, and merely as good as men at a few specific things.”
Okay, so this option two is still female supremacism.
Another problem is that this second option just simply isn’t true. If women are so superior at everything, then how come all successful historical societies have been led by men?
Female-led societies existed historically, they just didn’t do well.
You haven’t heard about them because they didn’t do well (and because it goes against the narrative).
This contradicts the idea that women are just generally better at everything except for a few minor things.
Also, note that your Western society now has far more female bosses and leaders and politicians than it did historically, and also your society has begun declining.
Sure, correlation doesn’t prove causation, but at the very least this doesn’t seem to point in the direction of women being substantially better in lots of ways and men only being better in some minor ways.
Moreover, women are generally biased in favor of women, yet even women typically prefer to be led by men (if they haven’t been brainwashed by “men are thrash” propaganda). Doesn’t that also contradict the idea that women are just better at everything?
Then consider that even in the present, all the best chess players are men.
Even in the present, something like 80% of new inventions are done by men.
Even in the present, something like 80% of new companies are started by men.
And that’s in the context of a society that’s hostile to men and actively trying to help women (including in some ways that are discriminatory against men).
So it’s clearly not true that women have substantial advantages over men while men are only better in a few minor ways. (Plus, that position is still female supremacism.)
Now I’m not saying women don’t have any qualities. I stand by the list I shared earlier in this message. Women really are substantially better than men in several ways.
The part that’s untrue is the part where it says “… while men are better in only a few minor ways.”
So then we’re only left with option three:
Option three: women are better in certain substantial ways, and men are better in certain substantial ways
If we don’t want to be female supremacists and have a worldview that makes it rational to preferentially hire women just because they’re women, then this is the only option. We’ve already debunked the other two possible options.
Fortunately, this third option is also true.
This third option is: overall men and women have equal value. And women are better in certain substantial ways. And men, too, are better in certain substantial (not just minor) ways. And society flourishes when men and women harmoniously work together, each contributing their skills and qualities.
In the last two parts we’ll discuss a few specific ways in which men are better.
So to not be a female supremacist, you need to have certain “men on average are better in this way than women” positions that are true, yet that your society labels as misogynist.
Personally, I don’t think it’s misogyny to say that men are better in some ways and women are better in some ways.
Meanwhile, if you have the so-called “correct” positions on gender according to your society, then in reality you likely have female supremacist views.
Yes, pretty much everything is upside-down in your society.
From my perspective: saying “men and women are both better in some substantial ways” isn’t sexist.
Rather, it’s the “women are better in a dozen ways, while men are better at nothing” society you grew up in that’s sexist.
I know that your society likes to hide behind “according to us, men and women are equal”, but again no one actually believes that. What people who claim this actually believe is “both genders are equal, but one is more equal than the other.”
To be clear though: obviously some statements that your society labels as misogyny are indeed just simply false. I’m not saying “every single statement that your society says is misogynist is in fact true.”
Women are good for more than housework, sex and children.
Women should have full rights (including voting).
Women shouldn’t be locked in the kitchen and women shouldn’t be banned from certain positions.
People should be treated as individuals rather than as representatives of a certain gender.
Just because one gender is on average better at something, doesn’t mean that everyone of that gender is better than everyone of the other gender.
Still. You have to acknowledge that men are better than women in certain substantial ways if you don’t want to end up with a viewpoint that’s both untrue and female supremacist, as we’ve shown.
The blunt truth is, pretty much everyone already knows deep down that men are better in certain ways than women. People are just not willing (or socially allowed) to say that. But such a massive collectively suppressed truth is going to do a great deal of harm, as you’re seeing in your society.
It’s only because people already know that men are better in certain ways that you have both men and women often tolerating systemic pro-female anti-male discrimination.
Some people might think that the current situation is alright and that we shouldn’t rock the boat and we shouldn’t start making arguments that men are better in some ways than women.
However, from my perspective those people don’t truly understand just how awful men are being treated, and how much a lot of men are silently suffering. Which is of course horrible in itself. And also, that makes society much worse for everyone, including women.
There are street interviews where women are asked what men are good for, and they answer things like “making women uncomfortable” and “not a lot.”
Well, if people genuinely believe that men have no gender-specific qualities, and women do have lots of gender-specific qualities, and men do almost all of the violence and the raping… then it’s completely rational to think that men are the problem in society, and that men aren’t good for anything.
That may sound horrible, but it’s simply the logical conclusion if you think that women have gender-specific qualities while men don’t, and men do the violence and raping.
So to avoid ending up in a truly awful place, you have to acknowledge that men are better in certain substantial ways. Plus, that is just simply true.
And it’s actually great that men are better in certain ways than women, because men can hugely contribute to society in those ways. Especially if you don’t crush men and tell them they’re awful all their lives.
I get that many women are afraid of being oppressed by men, but one: much of that oppression was actually done by hostile galactics and not by Earth men, and two: at present there really isn’t an appetite among men to oppress women. Sure, some men think like that, but they’ll be shouted down by both men and women and they won’t get their way.
A possible counterargument to “men aren’t going to oppress women” is abortion being illegal in some places in the US. However, one, not everyone would agree that an abortion ban is oppression. Two, note that 2024 Pew Research said that 39% of US men think abortion should be illegal in most or all cases, and so do 35% of US women.
So despite the narrative, this really isn’t a case of men oppressing women. After all, almost as many women as men are anti-abortion.
Other than that topic, at present there really isn’t a plausible scenario that leads to men oppressing women.
People might fear that this series will lead to some men wanting to dominate women and chain them to the kitchen. However the vast, vast majority of men don’t want that.
Plus, it’s not news to men that they’re better in some ways than women. I’m only telling men what they already know. Just because they haven’t been allowed to publicly say this, doesn’t mean that they don’t already know this.
Frankly, I suspect that some men (and some women) are wondering right now why I’m spending so many words arguing that your sky is blue.
The very few men who do want to chain women to the kitchen had that view even before they read this message. In fact I explicitly speak out in this message against chaining women to the kitchen.
Awful men are going to be awful regardless. And if you treat men fairly and you allow them to speak and you don’t force them to live under female supremacism, then good men will in fact make society better. Including for women.
Because how’s your current society working out?
New Earth can only be built hand in hand with men.
So long as a not insignificant group of women continue discriminating against men and continue trying to keep men down and continue the narrative of “us women are better than you men in a dozen ways and you’re better at nothing”, then New Earth can’t be built.
Obviously not all women do that. The point of this series isn’t “women are bad.” They’re not.
Yes, sometimes I am going to point out that some women behave in a bad way, but then again some men also behave in bad ways, as everyone already knows. That makes neither men, nor women bad overall.
The problem isn’t women. The problem is female supremacism.
Or, if you prefer, the problem is women’s unsafety and men’s lack of being loved that together led to female supremacism, as I described in part one of this series.
I get that women are afraid. But keeping men down will only make things worse, because all you’re accomplishing is that you’re keeping the good men down, while the awful men are awful regardless.
Perhaps the statement that men are better than women in some substantial ways doesn’t feel right to you. However keep in mind that most people buy into the worldview they were taught as a child, even if it’s a horrible one. And most likely you were brought up with female supremacism.
Most white people who were brought up in past racist societies had horrible views about black people. It would be a very rare white person indeed who was brought up in such a society who didn’t have horrible views about black people. Yes there were a couple, but most people aren’t the exception.
Most people initially just have the beliefs they were brought up with. And those beliefs seem normal and fine or at least tolerable to them, even if they’re really not.
Overcoming those beliefs is uncomfortable. But also, it is very much worth doing.
So in summary, my argument so far is: “your society is female supremacist, and to stop that we have to acknowledge the obvious truth that men are better in certain substantial ways, just as women are better in certain substantial ways.”
So, that was today’s message.
Next week we’ll have an unrelated channeling from another galactic so that we’re not constantly talking about this one topic, and then the two weeks after that we’ll finish this series.
I’m curious to hear in the comment section what you’re feeling or thinking, if you want to share.
Thank you for your open-mindedness and your courage to read a controversial, counter-cultural message.
With all my love and my deep respect,
Your star sister,
Tunia
** Source
** These messages are exclusively submitted to Eraoflight.com by the channeler. If you wish to share them elsewhere, please include a link back to the original post
If you want to meet like-minded Earth humans, please see https://eraoflight.com/2024/06/19/hakann-local-meetings-for-those-seeking-first-contact-with-benevolent-ets/
If you want to learn about a useful healing modality, please see https://eraoflight.com/2025/01/11/hakann-onion-healing/
Bonjour à tous
Personnellement, je commence à douter de l authenticité de ces messages.
Pourquoi A.S. insiste autant sur ce sujet?
Combien même il y aurait une sorte de suprématisme féminin dans toutes les sociétés occidentales, (ce qui n est pas si évident, il existe aussi des blagues sexistes envers les femmes), il y a d autres problèmes plus urgent dans notre société :
La pollution de la terre et le non respect des différents règnes végétal et annimal, la poperisation croissantes de la classe dites moyenne, ainsi que le drenage de l argent et autres ressources par une minorité, les réseaux de criminel en tout genre, les guerres, et j en passe.
Alors pourquoi cette focalisation que je trouve excessive et fausse sur les dynamiques de genre et le fait que les femmes laissent les hommes souffrir dans l indifférence ?
C est un peu comme si le cannalisateur faisait des généralités en faisant passer les femmes pour des mégères.
Je sais que je manque de recul, mais je ne crois pas que les femmes soient avantagées par rapport aux hommes sur terre.
Je me demande si le canalisateur ne fait pas passer les messages qu il veut , affin de nous influencer car c est un homme
Si c’est le cas, je trouve cela puéril
Hello.
Let us assume you are correct… Wouldn’t the fact you are a woman be equally suspicious?
There are plenty of other people and articles coming through in behalf of all these issues that you consider more important, usually chanelled by women…
and GOD FORBID a guy dares to comment how women in his life were unsupporting or unloving amidst one of your precious topics! He’d be ridiculed by all.
Why does a woman coming forth to say something new and nice about men for a change makes you go so far as to doubt the legitimacy of the channel?
Voyez comme ces messages divisent au lieu de rassembler
A.S insiste sur ce problème depuis un certain temps sans apporter un seul élément de comment guérir cette ” guerre des sexes”
Je ne suis pas là seule à douter de cette chaîne
Mais chacun est libre de croire ce Qu il veut
Je n impose pas mon opinion
1 – To claim these messages are divisive is divisive in itself! If you want union AND believe “everyone is free to give their opinions”, why insist that you are not the only one to doubt this channel? This only conduces to ‘union’ of people in one side…
2 – From what I gather, Tunia was very clear that the path to “solve this gender war” is for both men and women to acknowledge an existent imbalance favoring women. Especially, for more women to start standing up for men. NOT against other women, just in favor of men.
Je ne parviens pas à dormir
J en profite pour compléter mon précédent message
Au fur et à mesure que le temps passe, les messages de A.S. ont évolué
Les sujets sont moins diversifiés
Ils n’y a plus de réponses aux questions
Il n y a plus rien sur la situation mondiale
De plus, j ai relevé quelques incohérences
Des pleiadiens seraient intéressés à faire l amour avec nous, mais, comment cela paraît il possible s’il sont plus grand de 40 cm en moyenne ?
Cela est il possible étant donné une génétique si différente ?
Le viol est présenté par Tunia comme un petit traumatisme puisqu’il “ne permet pas aux femmes de choisir le partenaire avec qui on aurait les bons gênes pour procréer ”
Cette réflexion m’a choquée.
Le viol est un traumatisme si grave qu il peut affecté la personne sur plusieurs vies, s il n’est pas guéri dans sa totalité. C est quand même une intrusion dans le corps de l autres qui est, extremement douloureus sidérant dérangeant, glaçant, et qui entraîne une perte de confiance, d estime de soi une insécurité voire un dégoût de soi.
Les différents individus canalisé ont de plus en plus la même façon de s exprimer
Les dates indiquées par A.S pour l arrivée des galactiques reculent sans cesse et donc, sont fausses
On ne peux pas réellement vendre son âme aux démons et il n existe pas d entité qui se fait passer pour dieu et qui serait un piège
Voilà ce que j ai relevé
Maintenant je vais m adressé à A.S
Si ce que je dis est vrai, je crois que tu auras de plus en plus de difficultés à garder tous tes messages cohérence, je comprends que tu n ai pas envie d arrêter mais se sera de plus en plus dur de te renouveler
Je suis dégoutée d avoir si longtemps cru à tout cela
Je me sens arnaquée, et c est vraiment pas agréable
Je me trouve nulle à cause de ça
Je vais tenter de me désintoxiquer de ces messages
Je te reconnais néanmoins un talent d écrivain
Tu devrais écrire des fixions où bien protester pour que les hommes retrouvent le pouvoir
Sûr ce, bonne nuit
The few legitimate questions you presented have been addressed thoroughly in previous messages, the others are based in things that were simply never said or implied…
Remembering such a diversity of topics you suddenly have complaints about and ignoring the many repeated requests of others here to talk about this most difficult one is very insensitive and childish of you too.
But you know what? Thanks for exposing your reasons, and have a good night.
If you doubt that Western societies are female supremacist, then please make a substantive rebuttal of part 1. A link is included in this message. I don’t think “there are sexist jokes about women” is sufficient rebuttal; there are more sexist jokes / statements about men than about women.
Also, you probably won’t get called into an HR meeting for a sexist joke / statement about men at work. While I probably would get called into an HR meeting for a sexist joke / statement about women. Which isn’t by itself conclusive proof of, but points in the direction of female supremacism.
And if Western society is female supremacist, then obviously it’s important to spend a lot of time talking about it.
Also feel free to talk to men if you’re not seeing how much female supremacism is hurting men (and women). Or just look at, for example, male suicide rates.
As a woman of course it’s easy to say “this topic isn’t a big deal.”
As a hyperbolic example (I’m not saying it’s the exact same thing), suppose you’re a black person living a white supremacist society. What would you think about the argument “blacks, stop talking about white supremacism. You made your case once, and we ignored it, so now you can no longer discuss it. Societally we should worry about the wellbeing of plants rather than about your wellbeing.”
Just saying this:
“..Overall men and women have equal value.
And women are better in certain substantial ways.
And men, too, are better in certain substantial (not just minor) ways.
And society flourishes when men and women harmoniously work together, each contributing their skills and qualities.”
Would have saved much time & many words!
😉
I see what you’re saying. And that’s a valid perspective.
But see my reply to John for another perspective.
Okay, I’ll formally think about this topic below.
As the roles of pregnancy and primary child-rearing, women’s natural tendency is to engage in safe and easy activities within a relatively small familiar range centered on home, and have stronger attraction; while men’s natural tendency is to explore and adventure everywhere, looking for women or collecting resources for women, and dealing with many complex or difficult situations far away from home. Modern transportation technology has changed the distance of movement more than the nature of movement. Women tend to need to judge which men perform better and achieve better work results. The difficulty of this judgment is lower than the difficulty of achieving the work results itself, which means that men’s comprehensive processing ability is statistically stronger. Or you can understand it this way, men undertake greater survival and evolution pressure, things that challenge the physiological limits of humans are mainly done by men, the survival of the fittest within humans is mainly reflected in the competition between men, so men have stronger comprehensive processing ability. However, women’s love, beauty, and procreating are mainly not processing abilities, but they are particularly important, so you can also think that women have stronger comprehensive abilities than men. Imagine that in an ideal cooperation model, women and men are not equal in many aspects, because they have divisions of labor and complement each other in terms of functions, and the satisfaction of both with their lives are almost equal, which means that in the next reincarnation, the number of souls who voluntarily choose to be women and the number of souls who voluntarily choose to be men are almost equal.
This ideal model seems stable in theory, but it’s not stable from historical experience, partly because in this model, men have stronger logical thinking ability, stronger physical strength and spatial movement control, which means more control over economic activities, and greater potential to control and exploit the opposite sex. If the moral levels of men and women are almost the same, and this level is not very high — in fact, it’s not very high in most of history — women will be more easily controlled and exploited, their economic control will be reduced, and their education level will also be reduced, which makes it more difficult for them to get rid of the disadvantageous position, and this makes the moral level of men appear to be lower, although most of the terrible things are manipulated or carried out by hostile galactics. Therefore, women think that they should have more privileges, and men should be systematically weakened, so that women will not be at disadvantage in the gender war.
Obviously, from historical experience, achieving a balance of confrontation ability is a realistic solution, which means that the systematic abuse of men is reasonable in a certain sense. Due to the natural differences between men and women, pursuing a balance of confrontation ability means that there will be an imbalance in satisfaction or function, which leads to the overall happiness and overall productivity of the family or society not being in the best or even good condition.
However, the balance of confrontation ability is not the only truth. The premise for the balance of confrontation ability becoming a reasonable solution is that, both women and men are in a state of seizing or defending or competing for interests, and a confrontational mindset. If both sides are in a cooperative mindset, they will tend to return to the ideal model, and jointly explore how to achieve greater overall interests and more optimized distribution of interests. Moreover, loving someone often means that within a certain range, you not only want to make a fair deal with her or him, but also want that person to get more. If both sides think so, it’s very conducive to establishing a cooperative relationship. On the other hand, this is also related to the flexibility of both sides’ thinking. Below I’ll describe a process that partly shields or invalidates female supremacism.
Some sense of cooperative women and men both understand that the society needs a certain degree of female supremacism, and the specific degree is related to the moral level of society, mainly men.
Cooperative women may moderately oppose, or moderately support female supremacism, that is, moderately oppress all men on the macro level. Then make additional compensation to cooperative men who can be contacted, because they know these men are safe “friendly forces”. This is a bit like a retailer raising the public price, but providing additional discounts to VIPs.
Cooperative men may moderately support, or moderately oppose female supremacism, at this time, they will lose the love of many women, but they don’t care much, because they care more about the love of cooperative women. Cooperative women and cooperative men can consciously play the roles of bulls and bears, and better adjust the “market price” through cooperation.
Are you an Aquarius by any chance ?
Thanks for your thoughts. I think you make some good points, although I don’t agree with everything. And some of the things you’re saying will be touched on in later parts.
Some remarks (as a non-comprehensive reply):
– Agree that men and women are different, and society functions best when they cooperate.
– Indeed, as you touch on: it’s hard to tell women “you should go advocate for men’s rights” because often they’ll think “but I / women are struggling, I need to take care of me / women first.” But what might help is pointing out to women that ending female supremacism is one of the best ways to help women. Still a bit utopian maybe, but it’s a seed that can be planted. That’s discussed in part three. Great point.
– I’m not sure I’d call child rearing “easy.” Sure, just keeping a child alive is straightforward-ish, but being a truly good parent isn’t. And one could argue that the spiritual side is sort of women’s role too; it was, in certain societies. That said, yes, hunting a boar badly gets you killed, whereas child rearing and spirituality doesn’t. So I guess, bad hunters just die whereas bad mothers and bad spiritualists don’t.
– Interesting point that the stability of gender cooperation is undermined if consciousness isn’t particularly high. Of course it’s logical if you think about it, but I hadn’t seen it put quite like that.
– I don’t think I agree that “Some sense of cooperative women and men both understand that the society needs a certain degree of female supremacism, and the specific degree is related to the moral level of society, mainly men.” Now yes, raising consciousness / morality is critical. But I think that female supremacism stands in the way of that, because it just destabilizes society and then people are more focused on survival than on meditation.
Thank you, Tunia!
<3
Did you make a list of ways that men are better that was equally as long as the list of ways women are better?
🤔
Pretty sure it wasn’t the point of this article 🤣. Sure a bruised ego might find solace in reading such a list… But giving importance to such futilities don’t seem productive in the long run.
Is that list equally as long? Unless I get additional downloads and suggestions for additions to parts three and four, no.
But parts three and four will contain substantial and meaningful ways in which men are better.
Obviously I know the contents of all the parts, and the personal feeling I’m getting from the entire series isn’t “men are overall the superior gender” or “women are overall the superior gender” but rather “both have their strengths and we should work together.”
If you’ve been hurt, I empathize. I’ve been hurt too.
It felt kinda dull to read because, as you said, mostly everyone either knows that or isn’t likely to learn it only because its coming from a Pleiadean (albeit a woman, still the most external, neutral and practical perspective most of us have access to).
I honestly can’t see humans changing in regards to such a visceral issue just by reading statistics or a logical assessment proving female supremacy in fact exists and it’s socially disfunctional.
But I DO appreciate watching how people respond in subtle, subconscious ways by seemingly unrelated practical measures, because THAT always reflects actual beliefs.
As stated in the previous part, I believe either-gendered supremacy is also the opposite/complementary supremacy in the subconscious level – individually or collectively. This would be what you once referred to as the Soul level, i.e. “unless your soul also wants it, it’s not going to happen in your life”.
Our Sciences today mostly revolve around a materialistic bias – including Psychology (Psyche means soul) – so except for Jung, whose academic works are still seen as esoteric in most places, you wont find much empiric research backing the notion that only an inner work over individual male-female integration can have an organic reflex in society.
I gathered rather casual thoughts about this complementarity in the form of an article once, but I’m afraid it got lost in KR’s spam folder.
Fair enough. That’s entirely valid.
From my personal perspective:
Some people are well-meaning, yet currently convinced that it’s harmful to say that men are better in some specific ways than women.
I think that to reach those people, you have to make a careful and comprehensive and irrefutable argument. And sure, that won’t immediately cause a 180 degree change in their perspective, but it may plant a seed.
And if you want to plant a seed to change society, your argument needs to be so rock-solid that it’s unassailable.
I think this kind of comprehensive and irrefutable argument does plant a seed, whereas “men and women have different strengths, okay, bye” doesn’t.
Plus, this part two builds the foundation for the later parts, which may be more controversial than this one.
That said, none of this changes the point that to a lot of people, this message might have been somewhat boring and obvious.
Ah well. Different topic next week.
I understand, thanks. It seems like trying to explain to the user that the virus was installed because they clicked ‘I Agree’ without reading ‘Terms and Conditions’ while they insist that repeating the process with an antivirus will solve the problem.
Haha, thanks for the genuine laugh out loud.
Hi, Tunia! I read your message. My feeling is that whether it’s female supremacism, male supremacism, or any other dark, ruthless, and cruel things on Earth, the first step to solve them is to completely remove the conspiracy group, arrest them all, and then release the hidden high-tech to every people on Earth, regardless of their race. Then solve their material and survival needs, and treat people’s bodies. Without the pressure and pain of survival, I think a large part of human negative emotions will be directly eliminated, and then people’s ideological and moral qualities will be purified, healed, and educated. In this way, equality, love, forgiveness, and justice can truly develop. I am in China and deeply feel the social survival pressure faced by ordinary Chinese people. I have never been to the West, but I think part of the West should be the same. This is my opinion. Thank you.
From Henan, China
Totally agree with you su. It seems to be similar here in Central Europe. The Universe people love soul growth and since they don’t have that much of it in their utopic societies they admire our suffering and don’t seem to be in a rush in removal of the bad guys. They have been promising to blackmail the conspirators by flooding the internet with information, but nothing happened. They also say it’s our job to remove them and add that the revolution will begin when majority of people will acknowledge the existence of the conspiracies. Even thou our country has become a bizzare mafia circus with politicans and media lying and scheming 24/7 the majority of people, although very much confused, are unable to admit its all nonsense and there is no real democracy. They are hypnotized and very much weak to admit the truth probably out of fear of loosing the firm ground. Untill that happens, I am afraid we will have to work on our patience.
Please feel free to come here more often and tell us about life in China. We don’t know much. It’s all distorted propaganda on the internet.
Yes, that’s exactly the case. Spiritually righteous aliens living in utopia have never truly experienced human suffering and regard it as an opportunity for soul growth. This is perfectly analogous to the Chinese proverb “standing and talking doesn’t hurt the back”—those who talk without experiencing hardship can’t understand the pain of those bearing burdens.
China has a large population, but job opportunities are limited. Many ordinary people face great difficulties in finding employment, and working hours in China are generally longer than in the West. People endure dual pressures physically and mentally—some even fall ill and are hospitalized due to overwork, which further reduces their income. Although China has excellent infrastructure, medical costs remain high. Despite its advanced development, people’s lives are exhausting. Some Western media portray China as backward, but this is far from the truth. Fundamentally, we must see through the cabal’s narratives: only by satisfying humanity’s material needs can spirituality develop, for one cannot meditate on an empty stomach.
Je suis tout à fait d accord
I don’t have the perspective be able to judge if the galactics are the ones with a distortion, or if we are.
We could argue “the galactics don’t know what it’s like here on Earth, therefore they’re wrong” and that makes some sense.
Or we could argue “us Earth humans are over-identified with our current biological organism, and we’re in resistance to pain, and Earth life right now is the perfect time to release that.” Which also makes some sense.
I’m hesistant to conclusively say that clearly-wiser beings than myself are the ones who are wrong if we disagree.
My personal guess is that this current time isn’t optimal for us (relatively) awake people, but it probably IS optimal for the majority of asleep people. Because it seems really hard to keep being asleep in a period like this.
And then people might say “fine, just beam us lightworkers up then” but then Earth would become far more miserable for those who remain. Our light does help.
(When I comment, it’s just a normal, non-channeled reply written in the normal way as myself, the Earth human A.S.)
Hello!
I completely agree with you.
It’s just that the galactics want Earth humans to be the ones to arrest the dark controllers, and release already-available technology. But yes, the galactics I channel think that should have happened already.
Meanwhile average Earth humans aren’t in a position to do that, and the people who are (gray hats, military, intelligence agency people) have so far been unwilling to do it.
Galactics may eventually do a big intervention if Earth humans continue to not arrest the dark controllers, but from their point of view, they’d really rather that us Earth humans do it.
I’d personally prefer we do it ourselves to. But let’s face it… It has been ongoing for far to long.
I mean i’m not the type to be asking for help, but in this case i think i’l put my resistances aside and say we could use a helping hand.