My dearest Earth brothers and sisters,

This is R'Kok speaking. I greet you in peace and love.

Society is very complex, and people are different from one another. Still, I feel that there exists a basic pattern that is generally true and that is really important to the well-being of society, and to the men and women therein.

Namely: society thrives if men protect and provide for everyone, and if women love everyone and express that. 

Now obviously people shouldn't be forced into these roles. However if men and women are healthy, enough of them will naturally feel drawn to these roles that society thrives.

Note that currently both Earth men and Earth women are very far from that ideal.

The average person isn't even close to thinking in terms of: "what can I do to make sure that every single person on this planet is protected and provided for." Which is actually what men do in a healthy society. Or at the very least, in a healthy society men work towards making sure that the people in their local community are protected and provided for.

To be clear, I don't mean that men should start pushing for more governmental welfare programs and correspondingly heavier taxation. More of that isn't the solution. Heavier taxation is basically signing up other people for charity or volunteer work, except that the government might very well not use that money productively. Rather than forcing other people to get signed up for charity or volunteer work via governmental taxation, I suggest signing yourself up to do something tangible and useful in your local community.

After all, the saying is: be the change you want to see in the world. The saying isn't: use the power of the state to force other people to be the change you want to see in the world.

Although if you don't have the time or energy or health to do some volunteer work or to start some local initiative, I understand and I empathize. Indeed, go put on your own air mask first, that is entirely valid. I know that people are struggling and that things are really tough out there, and I'm sorry.

Still: men aren't even close to thinking in terms of: "what can I do to make sure that people in my local community are protected and provided for."

Similarly, the average woman on Earth isn't even close to loving everyone and expressing that. Note that I'm saying loving everyone -- not just loving the people whom she agrees with politically, not just loving accomplished and likeable people. I'm talking about loving everyone and expressing that, including loving so-called "bad people."

The experience of an average man, who hasn't done anything wrong but also isn't especially handsome or famous, is that most women are at best neutral towards him, rather than loving. And often, women are cold and indifferent and perhaps even hostile towards him or towards male preferences and interests.

Some women might think "it's not our job to love random guys" but that's precisely why your society sucks. If women think that it's not their job to love random guys, and men think that it's not their job to protect or provide for random women, then neither men nor women get what they need to thrive.

At the very least, let's agree to end anti-male discrimination.

There's anti-male discrimination when it comes to hiring, divorce court, criminal court and police. There's constant negative representation of men in movies. Radical feminists often shut down male shelters. There are more female-only university scholarships at a time when already more women attend university. There's far more money for breast cancer than for prostate cancer research. Men expressing typical male viewpoints get censored or arrested far more often than women expressing typical female viewpoints.

Now obviously it's only a small group of women who push for these measures. Yet, the majority of women don't lift a finger to oppose these measures. The amount of women marching in the streets to end anti-male discrimination is practically zero.

As a result, perfectly fine men, who haven't actually done anything wrong other than being born with a penis, usually aren't feeling love from women. More like the opposite. And so they often just withdraw and start focusing on things like video games.

And yes, men who prove themselves in some positive way often are respected and loved by women. However people don't do well if they're treated as suspicious until proven innocent and are only then given conditional love.

So: Earth men aren't doing what men need to be doing to help society thrive, and Earth women aren't doing what women need to be doing to help society thrive.

And unfortunately, these two things reinforce each other.

An average man probably experiences harshness and coldness or at best indifference from women as a group and from society. Likely he has a huge hole in his chest that is supposed to be filled by female love -- partly from his mother and his partner, but also partly just from women collectively being loving towards men collectively. 

Such a man is unlikely to want to take care of his whole community. At best he'll work to take care of his family, which is admirable in a way but not sufficient to cause society to thrive. And it's also entirely possible that an unloved man becomes selfish and destructive, or just indulges in distractions and addictions.

Conversely, it's entirely understandable for women who feel unsafe and materially insecure to not feel much love for average men. Because indeed, men as a group should be helping protect and provide for her, and they're failing at that. In fact, many women automatically harden up and become less feminine and more masculine if men aren't protecting her and providing for her, at least to an extent.

So: men don't feel the need to do their responsibility until women do theirs, and women don't feel the need to do their responsibility until men do theirs. So neither men nor women take responsibility, and neither gender gets what it needs.

Now, there's an idea among some women that men suck and that women should start ruling the world and then everything would be fine.

There have already been a number of prominent female politicians, including heads of state of important Western countries such as Thatcher and Merkel. Note that they were just another politician. They didn't transform their countries into utopias.

Queens were also more likely to wage war than kings in medieval Europe, dispelling the idea that female rule automatically leads to peace.

Now, obviously women shouldn't be barred or discriminated against if they try to become politicians or CEOs.

Still, just having more female CEOs or more female politicians isn't the solution.

I agree with the idea that the feminine is needed to heal society -- but what's needed isn't more female CEOs. What's needed is more women who love fearlessly and unconditionally and universally, and who express that openly. That, in turn, empowers men to want to take care of everyone.

In fact, people are so female-love-starved that many people in society have begun accepting bad proposals that are obviously unbalanced in the direction of being excessively feminine-energy (excessively caretaking of perceived vulnerable people) and insufficiently masculine-energy (insufficiently practical and logical). 

Examples of this are unrestricted illegal immigration, enforced covid lockdowns, preferential hiring of so-called vulnerable groups, and censoring and arresting people who say things that hurt the feelings of so-called vulnerable groups.

Yes, many of these things were implemented by men, but that's the point -- they were implemented by men who weren't nourished by female love. 

Men who don't get enough female love may actually lack masculinity and may become excessively preoccupied with getting approval from women. This is what you're seeing in Western men. 

The colder and harsher that women are towards men, the less masculine that men become -- except for a few narcissistic men who don't care about anything other than their own success and pleasure, or even a few psychopathic men who have decided that they want to set the world on fire.

If men aren't masculine, then that ultimately hurts both men and women.

So, how to fix this situation?

Well, either men need to be the ones to first move towards protecting and providing for people, or women need to be the ones to first move towards loving everyone and expressing that.

Because I'm a man myself, I'll address this from the perspective of: how can men help in this situation? 

Well, any man can contribute a little bit and be a part of the solution. You don't need to fix the world by yourself. I'm sure you can think of some way to contribute a little bit towards making your community safer and more prosperous.

I think this kind of local initiatives are usually more productive than engaging in national politics, except for those rare individuals who are genuinely called to be politicians.

At some point you might get actual leaders in office. However so far, national politics in the US is mostly a gender war by proxy.

The political left is mostly feminine-energy-aligned (taking care of people and nature, sometimes more of a focus on policies that emotionally feel good rather than policies that intellectually make sense). And indeed, most women vote left. Although this is changing because the mainstream US political left is becoming quite unhinged nowadays.

Meanwhile the political right is mostly masculine-energy-aligned (material abundance through economic growth, safety through closed borders and a strong military). And indeed, most men vote right.

And at least in the US, the fight between the feminine left and the masculine right is more bitter than ever. This hints that the sexes are fighting more bitterly than ever. 

And whether the masculine-energy-aligned party beats the feminine-energy-aligned party or the other way around, I don't think either will actually heal society. Maybe this new Trump will be amazing, but it's also entirely possible that he will be pretty good but not transformative, like the original Trump was.

In fact, the whole idea of political competition between the sexes, through the proxy of political parties, is sort of strange. 

Roughly speaking if you governed the USA with Pleiadian form of decision-making, then you wouldn't have a metaphorical fight to the death every four years about whether the feminine-energy-aligned party or the masculine-energy-aligned party gets to implement feminine- or masculine-energy-aligned policy.

Immigration policy wouldn't be set by the party or president who happened to be in power. Instead, you'd have a binding referendum that would set immigration policy for a certain number of years. And everyone would be invited to vote, with votes from higher-consciousness people having more weight.

If men collectively said: "in order to make sure everyone in our society is protected and provided for, we need to put a stop to illegal immigration" then most female Pleiadians would either vote for that because that's what men said, or if they disagreed or weren't sure they might simply not vote. Why? Because female Pleiadians trust male Pleiadians to protect and provide for them, and that also means that female Pleiadians listen to what men say is necessary to keep everyone protected and provided for.

Of course, this isn't female Pleiadians being subservient to men, this is just about female Pleiadians trusting men to take care of their domain and giving them the authority to do so. 

Spirituality is seen as more of a female domain, so when there is a referendum about a spiritual topic and female Pleiadians collectively express a strong preference, then your average practical-minded, physically-oriented male Pleiadian may vote along female lines or may not vote at all, trusting female Pleiadians to advocate for the right thing there. After all, male Pleiadians also trust female Pleiadians, just like female Pleiadians trust male Pleiadians.

For example, way back there were a series of referendums that boiled down to: should we help the people of Earth, and in what way? And during those referendums, female Pleiadians as a group strongly advocated for helping the people of Earth. Now even among male Pleiadians there already was a majority for helping Earth. Still, some male Pleiadians who were leaning towards voting not to help you, either voted to help you or chose not to vote at all, because they knew that female Pleiadians were spiritually wiser than they were and that's what female Pleiadians advocated for. So those male Pleiadians trusted the judgement of female Pleiadians on a topic that we would see as spiritual and more female-aligned.

I understand that you're not there yet. At the same time, it would be great if the men and women of Earth could start trusting each other and start working together again.

Currently, men and women in your society aren't really working together. They're mostly just working in their own personal interests and in the interests of their family. Now, for those individuals who happen to have a great relationship and a great family, this works decently well, but obviously not everyone does. So it would be better if men would see it as part of their responsibility to also protect and provide for their community, and if women would see it as part of their responsibility to love everyone and express that. Yes, I know that your society tells you that you don't owe other people anything, but well, that's why your society sucks.

I invite you to try something different instead.

I hope you found this helpful.

Your star brother,

R'Kok

Blog Post Layout © 2024 crystalwind.ca. All rights reserved. Hidden tracking code is embedded for monitoring purposes. We employ sniffer technology to track all IP addresses. Please note that using a Proxy/VPN/Tor will not conceal your IP address. The title for this article was created by CrystalWind.ca.