Channeled Human Wisdom for Modern Times

By Francesca Thoman

Containing the wide-ranging experience of numerous famous personalities that were quite eager to speak through Nikola Tesla and Francesca Thoman, Channeled Human Wisdom for Modern Times presents a feast of commentary on social, political, spiritual and human issues. With wise advice from nearly 30 personalities: statesmen, authors, actors, queen

• Language: English
• Publisher: Empowered Whole Being Press
• Release date: Mar 31, 2021
• ISBN: 9781513674155

Francesca Thoman

A conscious clairaudient channel for 30 years, Francesca Thoman has pursued a spiritual life since 1968, channeling wisdom from discarnates, extra-terrestrials, and elves, and has had the honor of channeling Nikola Tesla since 1995, creating seven books with him. Living in the San Francisco Bay Area with her husband, a computer engineer, Francesca is an award-winning author, UFO contactee, and Certified Akashic Record Consultant.

Book preview

Abigail Adams

Feminine and Masculine Politics, Part One:

From the Channel: Even though we have already shared some her article in the first Nikola Tesla Presents: Afterlife Lessons from Famous People, that there are so many changes and tenor of the times in America and other states and countries, families and businesses she insisted that she must share more. As we mention below, although John Quincy Adams was the first to present his information to be included in this book, he has asked that his mother present her article first instead. She has a deep, clear mind and has considered the nature of feminine politics for some time. She hastens to say that although masculine politics are incomplete, they are not evil, any more than any man or woman is evil. When you wish to harm anyone, you will find any method, and any excuse, to do so; when you wish to do good to others, you will find any method you can to move to create active compassion.

Subheadings:

•The Masculine Nature of Politics: Men’s Ways

•She-kings

•The Burden of Hierarchy

•Pushing from the Back

•Men’s Challenges

•The Feminine Nature of Politics: Women’s Ways

•Leading by Walking Beside

•Leading from Behind

The Masculine Nature of Politics: Men’s Ways

For this article, politics may be defined as not only the way a government gains and holds power in relationship to itself, its citizens, and other governments but also the way power is utilized in everyday human affairs: not simply the workaday world of the office but also the little businesses, institutional kingdoms, and governments of the family.

Governments have very human work to do: Ideally, they are meant to serve their citizens by providing for their needs, giving them a sense of collective identity, value, and purpose. Mainly, governments have been formed to manage collected monies for the common good with a fine sense of balance so that none are forced to carry unequal burdens of work or drudgery. A good government will do its best to prevent or remove what it can of blame, shame, or despair for everyone.

 Good governments are evolved not only to provide their citizens with good lives and good living, but also to deal competently with emergencies, challenges, or threats in such a fashion that the country will survive with its sense of self and the majority of its citizens intact. In this article, politics is also defined as the human way we raise other human beings in the family to be competent, compassionate, and perceptive people. Even though it may be built in some unusual fashions, all families have parents and children. At the very least, these children need love and instruction.

However, in those human terms, history’s chronicle is biased automatically: after all, it is his story, yes? Battles carve out the main shapes of human records, focusing upon who triumphed or who failed, who was the victor and who was the shamed loser, the captured land, and perhaps the captured slave. There is little if any time is given to attend to the issues of grief and loss: the grief of mothers for the loss of their children and husbands or the grief of sisters for their brothers or fathers.

Very little thought is given to the homes, farms, gardens, holy sanctuaries, and all the tiny, precious things and places that have been destroyed, especially those places that give men, women, and human families their sense of home. Indeed, these ravages are hardly considered except as an inevitable afterthought to the carnage and perhaps, in these and other terrible times, as fuel for revenge against other men, women, and children.

Save for a few, women are also hardly mentioned: for centuries women were granted only the scope that men allowed them through their condescension or, alas, through the sad necessity of women’s emotional manipulation of men to secure the woman’s safety. Murderous women were noted, particularly black widows; a few female healers became noteworthy for the good they did for men, at least when they weren’t being hung, crushed, or burned as witches.

She-kings:

Various queens and co-rulers such as Queen Victoria, Theodora, or even Queen Hatshepsut and others that ruled alone got some mention, occasionally; also scientists, sporadically, and usually as afterthoughts: too many contributions by female scientists of any kind are subsumed under their colleagues’ male names. The queens and rulers were given power in the main because they were able to act like men for a time. Even so, she-kings were generally the last choice: they were empowered only if there were no men to be had, i.e., if a woman was the only heir to the throne, business., or family.

Women were also given a chance to rule in situations or areas only after all the men were done with something and had moved on, leaving the opportunity behind them as some unimportant leftover, whether the men abandoned the project for reasons of boredom or ambition. Yet rarely, so rarely, are women allowed to rule others as women might rule when they not trying to be she-men out of pure desperation.

This last sentence is accurate yet demands some thought: in most human cultures of the last several thousand years, not only were women usually given chances to rule only when there was no other choice, they were still never considered the best choice. This whole issue of the double standard has been explored before at great length and more eloquently than I may do in this article by others more contemporary to you than I am.

Nevertheless, I find it important enough to go over again: what a woman does is of less value than what a man does, even bearing the children. Being a cook is not a high-status job; being a Chef is. Being a homemaker is also low-status: any woman can do it, right? As others have pointed out after my time, employing men to do those same jobs for the family as Nutritional Expert; Sanitary Maintenance Engineer; Interior Decorator; as Doctor; Educator; Counselor and Child Psychologist, and so on, would be ruinously expensive.

Also, these jobs would have had more respect paid to them because the expense was so high: the work which is paid well is seen as more valuable automatically, so that money, not the quality of the result, determines human value. Nevertheless, bearing, nurturing, and raising a caring, able, and loving child is generally quite a fine result, and quite valuable.

The deep trap within this double-standard bias is that: what you, as a boy-child or a man, don’t think as important becomes invisible or, worse, it becomes frighteningly mysterious and thus you automatically treat as a threat. This is because of the hierarchical nature of the masculine mind, which is arranged differently than a woman’s mind.

Men’s and women’s brains are different from each other as well, or at least they have been: for many reasons some of that is changing now. For instance, because there has been much carelessness with hormones in foodstuffs, there are new, highly creative, and adventurous souls being born now: they are working with the many issues that lead to blurred lines between the sexes, sometimes engendering much confusion, frustration, and loss.

But you must keep in mind that this originally masculine sense of hierarchy is quite necessary when dealing with other males. Yet when women are not perceived as a part of that hierarchy, too often they are not perceived at all.

The Burden of Hierarchy:

This automatic attitude of hierarchy costs Humanity: this begins with how boys are treated and how they see themselves. Especially when you are a boy child, and when you are developing within your hierarchical arrangements, you cannot show fear in front of your fellows, your pack of boys. A weak animal in a herd or pack will become the target of abuse at least and death at worst. In this sense, it can be terrifying to be a boy, especially if you show any kind of difference, any flaw, any feminine softness, or are even simply unprepared.

In this way, many boys are put into an impossible position: fearing what they don’t understand because they have had too little experience with it. Yet, since they need desperately to arrange themselves in a hierarchy, to stand above others, and to overcome any situation, these boys and boy-men must dominate the problem, the situation, and the other person. Or, in a final act of self-defense, they must devalue the feared thing as though it did not matter at all.

This works very well in the herd hierarchy but is a woefully inadequate method of understanding other human beings. This alone might help explain our misunderstanding of money and value, for instance: those who have less money are perceived to have fewer obvious trappings of strength and thus (to a hierarchical mind) deserve disdain, dismissal, or death.

To extricate yourselves from this iterative insanity, you need to consider the many ways women rule differently: ruling from beside another, from behind, from above, and from within. This is the true subject of my article.

These female methods of ruling others have evolved in part because women have automatically been given the task of training children, in part because most men do not understand children well. Because some men do not understand children, to retain their sense of place in the hierarchy, these men feel that they must therefore devalue children and devalue those who do understand them.

Men do remember being children, yes: they remember being boy children. When you are a child that is a boy, quite properly you seek at the least to emulate your father, understand your value to him. Once that sense of value is secure or at least a tentative part of your identity, as a boy you will work on determining your status within your peer group, your social arrangements, and within the world from the basic hierarchical viewpoint.

As a boy, unless you have been saddled with a baby sibling to care for, you only have to arrange yourself in accord with hierarchies of other boys: where do you fit, what’s your task, who’s above you, and who’s dominant over you? Who is lesser than you?

Once that is satisfactory, this is all you need to do. You don’t really need empathy, understanding, or compassion; nor do you see much reason to do the work of comprehending someone different from you, or even to learn much in the way of friendship.

Once you know where you fit you can relax, at least until that balance is upset. Granted, many men are more than this: they treasure friends, respect those that are different, seek rapprochement when needed, respecting women and other strange beings. Yet, when adhered to unilaterally, the hierarchical structure does create many human limitations.

Pushing from the Back:

In time, some men have learned these womanish methods of leading others that I list below, whether through having some deep shock that has opened their hearts, or perhaps from being raised by competent and intelligent parents. Generally speaking, men dictate to others, ruling from the back, driving others on in front of them. The men who lead the charge are called heroes yet they, too, are often mid-range subordinates, still driven forward by someone higher in the hierarchy that is pushing the heroes on from behind.

The force that drives those under the control of the top man in the hierarchy is fear: a deep, abiding fear which causes a man to drive innocents, combatants, friends, and enemies from behind through insisting, exhorting, dictating, and dominating. This way is often terribly single-minded: focused upon the desired goal, there is no time to waste upon any other considerations such as human cost, misery, loss, or harm.

Because the boy-child is still a part of the man, however old he is, too many men cannot bear uncertainty, mystery, inadequacy, or failure. The child’s family father or, perhaps, the imagined father that is simply a reflection of rigid cultural definitions, can set impossible and strangely limited ideas of male perfection. Such a rigid father would never approve of not being a man and would dominate the child through shame, blame, pity, aggression, or even obliteration to make the child into that limited image.

I make a subtle distinction here between pushing from the back and leading from behind, which I describe below as one of the ways women express their leadership. When you push from the back you are driving others forward towards your goals at their expense. Conversely, when you are leading from behind you are working to improve, assist, and allow the person you are working with, to increase their knowledge, experience, courage, and accomplishment until that person may forge ahead on her or his own.

In my opinion, for any leader to guide or even to rule someone from behind successfully, she or he must learn to work with and fathom the strange and paradoxical nature of a child: dependent and yet sovereign; sensitively tender and yet oblivious; eager to learn and yet contrary to all expectations; at once helpless and manipulative, courageous and terrified; wise and entirely inexperienced.

Undoubtedly this demands attention, empathy, wisdom, and caring. Ideally, you will have learned those things in your upbringing, although for some of the reasons listed above this is unfortunately not often the case.

Pushing from the back only requires a single-minded will, an eye that is alert for dissension in the ranks, and perhaps a forceful voice you can use for commands. As I will describe below, leading from behind demands patience and understanding, perception, and empathy, for you cannot lead those you don’t understand.

As I will also explain below, leading by walking beside another person demands that you feel you are the equal of this person at least, even though you may not consider this person a friend. Leading by example takes tremendous patience and trust: you even need to accept the possibility that the other person may never learn what you are showing him. Leading from above, lest it becomes blind dominance, demands your own moral, psychic, emotional, mental, and spiritual strength and clarity.

Men’s Challenges:

Unfortunately, many men have been callously treated when forming their character: their emotions were ignored, their autonomy overrun and, far too often, they have been given or allowed few tools with which to deal with any of these issues. Such damaged men, even as they happily demand that their boy-child be one thing or another, do their best give that boy-child the relaxation derived from knowing his place in the hierarchy of other males. But such a man cannot comprehend the paradoxical mathematics that is a girl-child or even the astonishing calculus of a sensitive, caring, creative, responsive, and tender boy.

Again, recall that too many men confront the unknown with fear and as a result when they encounter Mystery, they are afraid enough to feel bereft of power. To feel powerful, they stoop to control: again, driving from behind. When someone is running away from you, whether willingly or no, they are certainly not confronting you and in fact at least appear afraid of you, which console the parts of you that are terrified of what you cannot control.

When you are pushing others from the back, no one can confront you very well: this is often simply because of all the others that are between the challenger and you. In a hierarchical situation such as an army, such fine points such as the buck private’s desire and need for personal autonomy must be obliterated in the overwhelming demand that an army must more as a coherent unit. However, any child, whether grown to maturity or not, is certainly dis-improved when he or she is obliterated for whatever reason, though war certainly demands such obliteration.

The status wars within businesses, the competitive triumphs, and all similar exercises of imposing hierarchical values, shape people and events in ways that satisfy those that value the hierarchical structure. In a hierarchy, actions are straightforward in essence, though complicated in detail; moreover, the results are generally quite apparent to those who feel they have won. For men such as these, the most impossible calculations are for those that need guidance and autonomy simultaneously: in short, children.

Granted, children are resilient. They must be to contain, repair, or overcome the various assaults upon them created by the single-focus thinking, impatience with ambiguity, obliteration of their wants by others’ needs, and lack of comprehension from their often too-limited caretakers. All children know that to survive, they must learn and thus will learn by whatever means available, and to whatever amount possible.

The Feminine Nature of Politics: Women’s Ways:

Whenever a man cuts himself off from Mystery, the Unknown, Magic, or Wonder he becomes crippled in ways that he cannot fathom for, too often, in his rush to know his hierarchical standing amongst his fellows, he will put aside his original sensitivity to acquire that standing.

There have indeed been times when a boy-child had to learn to defend his body, his rights, and his standing: too often boy children are forced to learn how to fight to succeed and thrive. However, I do most strongly point out that this most often happens in wars, which were brought upon the child’s family by other damaged men!

Women can certainly be petty, small-hearted, enraged, furious, vengeful, sarcastic, and hurtful, or many other less-than-gracious versions of themselves. Yet it is important to remember that, although the spirits of nations have been depicted as women, women are not generally known for instigating wars. They will fight for tangible and intangible things; they will show uncommon bravery when confronted with threats to themselves, their families, or their countries. But they don’t usually start the fights.

Women work in subtler ways than engaging in war: they seek to find unity without uniformity; to make laws by consensus; even to compromise on as many unimportant things as they can to allow the important things to be accomplished. Generally speaking, women do their best to find the truth of something, rather than allow illusions to eat them alive. They also generally assume that every person has the possibility of being his best self.

Leading others towards their wholeness and completion demands spiritual, if not shamanic, abilities, as much for you than for the child or colleague you might be teaching. Because women are no longer recognized as priestesses, leading with compassion is far more difficult now than formerly. Formerly, women were the lens through which the Divine Wisdom could shine and they were the ones who knew the hidden ways of Mystery and Magic because they had already encountered both with and through love.

Leading by Walking Beside:

Another way of leading men, women, or children is to walk beside them. The friend that goes jogging with you; eats your favorite salads with you; celebrates your accomplished changes with you as one equal to another, is an example of this. The woman that sits beside her child to help him or her struggle through homework; the man who runs alongside his child for the child’s first bicycle ride, or the man that makes his training and expertise available to a new employee without demanding, commanding, or controlling him or her, are all examples of leading from beside.

Hierarchies cannot recognize this method because they demand top-down ordering: only one is greater and so all the others are various degrees of lesser. There are always times when this is appropriate, though it is both interesting and disquieting to note that most of those times have to do with dealing with threats, emergencies, and disasters of one kind or another. In these fraught situations, subtle and gentle social structures are necessarily eclipsed and often must be. Yet if those threats and emergencies are invented or engineered, what is the true cost to humanity?

Leading by walking beside someone is automatically built upon your esteem for, and the value of, your friendship or love for the one you run beside. In this situation you are not at war: you are working together with one another. One may be the teacher and the other the student; one may be the parent and the other the child; one may be a friend with you, or another may simply be someone you know you can assist, but in all cases there is harmony.

You can put aside war when walking beside someone you consider equal to you in value. You cannot drive from behind when you are walking beside. You cannot seek to obliterate that one you are leading into her or his competence: if you did that, you would never be able to impart your learning. If you did not walk beside your friend you would be alone; if you saw him as an enemy, you could do nothing of value with him.

This, to me, is why peace must surely be the start of true civilization, as others have said before.

Leading from Behind:

For a rigid, perhaps military mind used to the hierarchical thinking that drives others in front of the man who is afraid, leading from behind by allowing space into which the child can move forward while supporting her or him, often seems quite silly and complicated. When a job must be done it must be done! In wars at least but so often now in too many other situations, time is of such importance that it is allowed to overrun any human concerns.

Yet in this rush to outrace the fleeting nature of time and circumstances, you can shock Time itself. At the very least, this will strain or even eradicate the precious, tender type of time that is engaged in the simple state of being alive.

When you have time to be alive, you have time to love and care for others. Men are too often both untutored and unpracticed in compassion, empathy, or even any sympathy. And so the task of leading from behind or beside another is automatically left to women: once again they must take up a task for which too many men are ill-fitted. It is a tremendous human loss that many of these men reject sympathy and compassion, and then will not understand either.

As I have stated above, women will reach towards empathy and understanding more often than many men will; this is again because they must deal with the utterly paradoxical nature of children. Fragile and stubborn, loving and selfish, hiding their bewilderment under bravado, ennui, manipulative, and still desperately needs a sense of the road ahead of them, children can only be driven forward into Fear at the cost of their finer selves.

For men as for women, leading from behind can shine a soft light all around a child so that he or she can see the way. Leading from behind may also allow this child to see his or her inner shadow. This shadow may be dark and ugly or it may be shining, creative, and loving but it cannot be seen when the child is being driven, for then all the child’s attention is focused upon the threat from which he flees.

Leading from behind gives support without demands; it opens challenges in such a way that the child reaches towards those challenges instead of being shoved into them. By providing space, materials, opportunities, and friendship, the one that leads from behind will make trust the core of the relationship. When you lead from behind, you allow but do not command; you nourish but do not require growth.

There is a saying that behind every great man is a good woman, and in the sense of leading from behind, women do promote others frequently. On the other hand, when women lead from behind they are not wearied by the fray of hierarchical positioning. Indeed, through being invisible, inaudible, and overlooked, women are often more free to be who they are than those that would react to any challenge by fighting and war. This can be an utter relief!

Abigail Adams, the wife of President John Adams and the mother of President John Quincy Adams was born in 1774 Weymouth, Massachusetts.

Part Two follows.

Abigail Adams

Feminine and Masculine Politics, Part Two:

From the Channel: For the reader’s sake, and with Mrs. Adams’ approval, we have put this article into two parts.

Subheadings:

•Leading by Example

•Leading from Within

•Leading from Above

•What do Women Want?

•The Hierarchies of Paranoia

•The Theory of Mind

Leading by Example:

The best way for some women and men to lead is by example. It is a trial, sometimes: it takes the understanding that a child, family member, or person you are trying to train first has to develop himself to the stage where he can understand the example. Someone that is not developed enough to have compassion can rarely comprehend examples based upon compassion. Thus leading by example also demands that you present those examples in forms that can be communicated to the recipient in his or her language and sense of values. This takes perception, compassion, and wisdom.

Imagine someone that has lived a very rough life: bullied and battered by father and his so-called ‘friends’ in his school or workplace; burdened and teased, and shamed. As you can imagine, this person would find it exceedingly difficult to feel compassion for someone else, especially someone that seems weak or pitiful: the weakling’s pain would surely remind him too starkly of his own. For, when this unfortunate man was vulnerable, he received censure, unkindness, and even disdain. Therefore he has toughened himself up to the point that he is shut down in heart and mind to retain at least some sense of himself.

Yet, if you were to find what was precious to him: his dog and her puppies, the cat and her kittens, perhaps even birds, roses, or orphans, the best way to connect and commune with this person would be to show your genuine concern for what matters to him. This must never be done to manipulate him: he has had far too much of that already. Yet to the degree that you can care what he cares for, you can lead him into his compassion by showing him the honest integrity of your own.

Leading by example takes tremendous patience, patience that is not attached to results. In any hierarchy, this method would be a certain recipe for frustration, if not disaster, especially when the beneficial, compassionate example you have shown again and again is rejected consistently. Yet, as often happens, when someone other than you offers that same example, perhaps even less competently, the child or friend will leap into following it and this other teacher with great joy, forgetting the years you have spent tilling the earth of the ground to allow that very possibility.

Leading by example demands a fine, strong sense of ethics; a comprehensive and perceptive sense of what the whole person, community, country, or even the world needs, and how to retain a sense of your true self in the midst of meeting those needs. Leading be example demands a tremendous amount of self-knowledge.

Leading From Within:

Another way in which women and some gifted men lead others is from within. Certainly, this to happen with parenting: you do indeed find that you are led from within by the tapes and old voices you heard when you were young. And often you still hear those old voices in your head decades later, causing you to act just like your mother or sound just like your father. It seems as though your parents’ thoughts migrated into your mind directly, sometimes well before you had enough mental acuity to change that input.

To a degree, this is true: until recently, all children needed to learn nearly everything from the beginning, every time. Now, however, the new souls entering the rough and tumble of Earth again are full of new intentions based upon old experiences, More and more of them are coming with fresh memories of what worked, what didn’t serve anyone, and the best way to act lovingly.

The way that good women and good men may lead from within is to speak from listening and listening to speech. Your wisdom is based upon your own experience and the intuition that comes from your more refined, deeper self: the angel-part of you that remains in the Heavenly state and allows you to gain that wisdom from listening and then speaking.

Unfortunately, sometimes when you listen to another, with little thought of you, and speak while being entirely present with a person emotionally and mentally, you may fall into the other person’s misery. Yet if your inner wisdom belays you with a rope of compassion, you can call upon the Divine Wisdom within and attune to your Divinity. This provides the leverage you need to care for someone without becoming caught in his troubles.

When you listen to another with this wisdom, very often the answer that person seeks may be found in his or her voice, gestures, and physical attitudes as much as from his or her words. When you listen with calm perception, and you trust your compassion, you find harmonies, resonances, sympathies, and inspirations simply by listening with your mind and heart together.

In this way, your speech, based upon compassionate perception, will touch the other person’s heart. This is most often because your inner attention is harmonious to his and yet is the higher octave, the higher awareness in your spiritual nature. More than leading from example, this type of leadership can be immensely healing: your state of heart, mind, and soul give your friend, colleague, or family member the quiet light by which he may see his way.

You do not push or drive from behind: you see the direction his mind and heart are already facing and shine the kindly light of your regard in that direction so that this other person opens back up to his will or her sure delight and so moves forward. With this inner light, the other person may step forward freely, discovering the strength and grace that was already there. This is the best way to lead: from egalitarian greatness, through shared greatness, into human greatness.

Leading from Above:

As I said earlier, women may lead others from above. Now: in the hierarchy, this simply means that one is above in power to another or, as has been coined recently, the hierarchical leader leads through power-over, which is one form or another of domination.

Domination may create emotional extortion; it will use physical, financial, or political leverage to force someone to do a certain thing or act in a certain way. Domination is the culture of the brute or the vicious child, the gang or mob rule that demands everyone to be on guard and ready to defend his territory to control his life at every turn.

For women to lead from above means not only to lead through inspiration, rather like leading from within but to lead compassionately from a natural, canny insight supported by their own experience and their spiritual aspiration. Especially for women and men who are gentle, leading from above means to lead through wisdom and understanding, This inspires others, opening possibilities that help each one achieve his or her best desires.

It also means at least to a degree to become a focal point for the inspiration itself, as in the political personifications of women as La Belle France or Motherhood and Apple Pie. Ironically because women act as a focus through which any hierarchy’s various goals may be perceived, this form of leading from above works best within the natural states of hierarchy. If men must fight beyond their natural powers and beyond their natural desires, they feel courage when they are presented with a beacon: something shining that is greater than they and is yet within their reach.

Leading from above happens in structured situations where a woman is an educator, supervisor, director, or commander. In these cases, a woman might have a refined awareness of the needs of the whole and so be able to pull the group together towards fulfilling those needs.

In this sense, leading from above is organic: under such leadership, the people in an enterprise or learning situation may not only see how they fit with others but also how, by fulfilling others’ needs, they may fulfill their own in even better ways. Because it is generally crafted with the benefit of everyone in mind, leading from above is also both subtle and tactful.

Leading from above also means that women become the Seers, the Wise Women, the Shamans, the Priestesses, and the Spiritual Guides for the group with whom they are working, and open the group’s courage in this fashion. Needless to say, this is done through women owning and nurturing their spirituality from a place of deep knowing.

When trained, human beings may see the invisible, hear the inaudible, and touch what cannot be felt. And, for those women and men that have learned care for others, they may receive excellent directions from the Unseen Source. Humanity lost more than it realized when the wise ones of both sexes were automatically assumed to be evil by those leaders who were afraid of people they could not control.

What do women want?

 Dr. Sigmund Freud is famous for asking, "What do women want?" He found women’s minds to be overly emotional, peculiar, frustrating, and sometimes incomprehensible: their needs and wants seemed to defy the masculine and, therefore, the scientific, intellectual, and even human understanding of the time. It is a truism to say that men comprehend men well but do not need to comprehend women, though women must comprehend both men and women: this has been a cultural bias for centuries.

One of the main reasons for this bias and its inequality is that the hierarchical structure is partly genetic. Indeed, many times children playing resemble troops of chimpanzees, with dances of dominance and placation; bullying and submissiveness; gang-like, infant cabals vying with sisterhoods, and so on.

For some, chimp societies are like a Mafia: loyalty to the one boss chimp is one of the main currencies for male chimps, while in the face of the bullying dominance, which the males seem to need to do to feel powerful and thus relaxed, the females are left to manage as best they can.

In more recent times, you have understood that women have invested a great deal of themselves in children and family. It seems obvious that women in politics would push for paid maternal leave, income parity, more city parks, schools, better prenatal care, and the like. And certainly, this is often so.

However, children and family are not the only desires of women: the true longing of nearly all women is to express creativity and love. Ideally, women do this by creating love; creating with love; loving the process of creating and creation, and then loving what or who has been created.

Often women do this loving creation by harmonizing difficult situations; listening to and responding to true needs; creating and supporting Beauty, Compassion, Grace, and Caring wherever possible; looking for, evoking, and celebrating this Love, Beauty, and Creativity by which you are all created.

What women want is to allow Life and that which is living to thrive in balance, grow in beauty, and for each person, creature, or thing to succeed at his, her, or its best. Regrettably, fear, trauma, abuse, and even recreational drug use can warp women’s creative abilities and expressions to the point that they forget their spiritual search.

Indeed, if there is enough fear wrapped up within their creative processes, women will fight everyone around them with rage and fury because they know that their ability to create is not based simply upon artistic expression: women’s creativity expresses Life’s longing for itself as Khalil Gibran put it so eloquently. This may also be why women submit to and can remain in abusive situations: they know that they are not just protecting their lives but also the lives of others.

Unfortunately, this naturally inclusive attitude, which sees all of Creation as a part of women’s care, runs hard into the demands of hierarchy, especially when political conflicts, grabs for personal power, manipulation by fear, and even war are used to control the hearts and souls of human beings.

The Hierarchies of Paranoia:

 There is a subliminally paranoid structure in masculine politics: the idea that someone under you will challenge you