We have discussed the fear, now unfortunately, we must consider anger, the rage. We remember that the infant screams in rage and terror at three and a half years old, reliving the events of the Great Catastrophe.
1) Fear and anger are natural emotions. I suggest that the exaggerated human rage and terror are not given in nature; they are legacies of our ancestors’ response to the Great Catastrophe.
The rage we are discussing here is terrible, very strong, a violent emotion and is probably within each of us. The rage is surrounded by, buried within very strong taboos. Though it may be that many individuals experience this rage, it is a closely guarded secret, and the taboos decree that it must be kept secret.
2) It is a given in nature that the mother, any mother must protect her young. As human beings, we have the maternal instinct to protect the baby + the Great Catastrophe and resulting exaggerated rage and terror + the deep, strong taboos which prevent us resolving the rage and terror.
3) I have mentioned earlier that shortly before he died George Frankl wanted to write his new insights, and that two of his publishers refused to let him, ‘God’s wife’ and ‘The Angry Publisher’. Let us investigate why.
‘God’s wife’ was a mother, with a well developed instinct to protect her young, (in fact all adults by this time); she became aware that Frankl’s new insights threatened the taboos; and this threat to the taboos made her feel that her young were threatened.
‘The Angry Publisher’ didn’t have children; she was and is an intelligent and educated woman, honest and straightforward. Yet it was she who went to Frankl’s home and severely intimidated him and his devoted nurse. Why? It was ‘God’s wife’ who felt threatened, so why did the ‘Angry Publisher’ behave so badly?
I suggest that there is empathy here. I do not suggest that ‘God’s wife’, the frightened mother figure, was manipulative towards ‘The Angry Publisher’, and certainly not consciously manipulative. But I speculate that the honest, straightforward and good natured ‘Angry Publisher’ felt the deep fear of ‘God’s wife’, and without being consciously aware of the causes of her anger, she rushed to the defence of the frightened mother figure.
I further suggest that the origin of war is in the deep and traumatised fear latent in mothers and ready to burst out; the mother experiences deep fear with concern for her baby; the male responds by looking outside for the causes of the female terror; the male finds the stranger, the ‘enemy’ and fights to defend his wife and baby from her fear.
So that the horror of war arises originally out of the traumatised maternal protective instinct.
The Maternal Instinct to Protect 2
There is also anger associated with a threat to the young; a mother will be afraid, and very likely angry if she feels her child is threatened. I do not know how common this is, perhaps it is comparatively rare, or perhaps it is very common. But there is, at least in some mothers, a terrible anger, a rage. I have been somewhat aware of this, but recently it was presented to me, quite forcefully: a mother, with adult children living abroad, an intelligent and educated woman, very pleasant; someone she didn’t know well made a polite enquiry about her children; and, though she didn’t say anything, I experienced her fury, like a blast from an explosion. Extraordinary, and frightening.
This maternal rage is feral, wild, so that the woman for a moment was like a savage wild animal. A lion whose cubs are threatened will attack physically to defend them. But lions are predators; woman are not predators. Human beings are not natural predators. The fury the woman above felt - and transmitted to me - seems unnatural, and I suggest it is another result of our ancestors’ response to the great catastrophe; as if in their bewildered fear and anger they had decided to imitate the behaviour of powerful predators. I believe this is known as sympathetic magic.
Whether or not this terrible fury is a given in nature or a traumatised response, the fury is present in at least some women, when they feel a threat to their young, however vague that threat may be. And there is the capability to transmit this fury to others. The matriarch, like ‘God’s wife’ or the woman mentioned above, is able to alert others to the rage to protect her young.
You will often have read or heard that a specific ability or attribute in a species of animal is the product of that species evolution, and helps the species to thrive. But our human evolution has been very seriously interrupted and undermined by the phylogenic traumas and our ancestors’ responses; and I cannot see that this fury helps our species to thrive.
‘God’s wife’ learnt that George Frankl had uncovered the significance to woman of the great catastrophe - he knew; she feared that he would challenge and remove the taboos; that fear seemed to her a threat to her young; she became enraged; and transmitted her rage to the ‘Angry Publisher’. All done unconsciously; all that dread and rage working in the unconscious mind of ‘God’s wife’.
If she had been able to talk to Frankl about it - but she could not talk about this fear and rage: she was unconscious of what she was experiencing. And more than that, the fear and rage are surrounded by, protected by deep and strong taboos, and in the mind of ‘God’s wife’ and others to challenge the taboos represents a threat to their young. I do wish ‘God’s wife’ had felt able to trust George.
The Maternal Instinct to Protect 3
So simple, after all.
But before we discuss this major cause of our distresses, I want to mention two videos on YouTube of animal mothers protecting their young. The first shows a chimpanzee who has twin babies; the other females want to take them from her; she runs away but they chase and corner her; she holds her infants close to her and protects them with her body, until the others give up.
The second video shows a lioness with her cubs; she is watchful, but relaxed, very easy; a predator, a hyena, appears and the lioness chases it away.
Neither of these animal mothers shows anger; the chimp does not hit out, or stamp her feet or scream; the lioness merely chases the hyena away. They protect their young.
In the cultural infancy of our species there was maturation delay, and our ancestors learnt to lie; the maturation delay ended and, thinking that they had caused it to end, our ancestors exalted, they thought they were very clever; then came the terrible catastrophe and they were plunged into terror and were enraged.
In their response to this trauma, they used their ability to lie to pretend to be savage predators: they must protect their young, and they would stop ‘it happening again’ by a display of fury.
Pretending to be, identifying with savage predators was a kind of magic, sympathetic magic, and it must never be spoken of or the magic would fail, they would be defenceless and ‘it would happen again’.
In their fear, our ancestors did not see that even the most savage predator mothers are gentle to their young, and that the predators are not naturally angry; they kill to eat, (and watching film of lionesses hunting, they do not seem to be angry, merely determined).
We are not natural predators, and never were; we do not have the teeth and claws and such powerful bodies, so our ancestors armed themselves, sticks and stones, spears, knives, bows and arrows and on until now we have nuclear weapons. And does any of that protect the young? No, of course not. With our weapons and war we make ‘it happen again’ and our children are damaged, traumatised, maimed, killed.
In those early times our ancestors thought anger was a defence. And ever since we’ve kept the anger, passing it on from generation to generation. It doesn’t work, the anger clearly isn’t a defence, but we’ve kept it because we still, unconsciously, think anger defends us, and we mustn’t talk about it for fear of breaking the magic.
Well, we’re talking about it now. In the cultural infancy of our species, our ancestors were traumatised children with no grown ups to look after them and guide them. Now we can grow up and help ourselves.
We humans are descended from medium-sized apes, all of us from the most fearful dictator to the most ragged tramp. The chimps are our nearest relatives. We sometimes get angry and sometimes we’re frightened, but we are naturally cheerful. And in each of us is the inner consciousness which is wonderful.
And each of us is fundamentally good natured, every one of us is born good and loving.
The Money Puzzle
What do we know about money? The ancient Egyptians worshipped gold, the called it the skin of the gods. Many people do still apparently worship gold, and very many seem to worship money. But gold is not money. Gold is real, a given in nature, though it seems odd to worship it; money is a human construct and it is in everything: we can’t eat without money, or drink even water without money; or wash, or sleep in our beds; the roof over our heads is provided by money; everything, everything dictated by money.
What do we know psychologically about money? That in every language money = shit; money is dirty, you’re filthy rich or you’re dirt poor. Money is very closely with the anal product.
And how does money relate specifically to women?
I must declare an interest: I really dislike money, though I do recognise that one must have at least some money to survive. My parents were very poor and used to have terrible rows about money. My father was good and kind, my mother was often furious. He didn’t mind too much not having money, she did mind very much, but she wouldn’t let him get a proper job. I was there, I witnessed it. And he obeyed her, so they were poor.
Then when I happily left home, though I worked I still had no money to speak of. Sometimes young men, who did have money, would take me out to dinner. Which was lovely. If any of these young men expected me to pay for my dinner with sex, I don’t know. I knew that some girls paid for their dinner with sex, but I didn’t take it personally; it simply didn’t occur to me that I should pay for my dinner with sex. If any of the young men did expect it, they never said. They were very nice.
So, money and women and sex.
Some women are prostitutes and sell sex for money. And some prostitutes, and feminists, have pointed out that a woman who marries is selling sex for money. This is a point of view very distressing to respectable married women, but it is a valid view point: the man provides the money, the woman provides the babies, and the sex.
When was money invented? Not that long ago according to the net; a few thousand years, some time after the collapse of the late matriarchy, when women were in great psychological distress.
Why was money invented? There must be a good reason because human nature is fundamentally good. It is possible that money was invented by men for bartering with; but that is was quickly used by men to try to help women, along the lines of, ‘See, I have wealth enough to provide for you and our babies, and you will be safe with me.’ And, certainly this is the model which has lasted until our own time; it is an old tradition.
But money doesn’t help. It is a trap.
In the 1960s during the sexual revolution, the Women’s Liberation movement wanted women to have sexual equality with men; women wanted to be sexually free as men are - comparatively - free. But sexual liberation is very difficult to achieve, and Women’s Lib became Feminism; the emphasis changed from sexual liberation to financial independence. (The Feminists presented as very angry, and blamed all their troubles on men. They shouted a lot. Personally, I don’t like being shouted at. Fifty years on, those lovely and respectful young men who bought me dinner, have grandsons, some of whom behave very badly and disrespectfully to girls and young women. I see a clear connection between the angry Feminists blaming men, and the present nasty behaviour of some boys and young men. Feminists lost the moral high ground when they raged at, intimidated and blamed men. The girls and young women are paying the price. I also see a link between angry Feminism and the gender confusion of those girls and young women who deny their own femaleness: furious women are not good role models for girls. Ladies, be nice, be kind, be polite, be rational in your arguments. Remember the guiding principle of reason with love.)
Money is a trap? Yes, for women certainly. Money=shit, and is an anal product.
Early on in this work, we discussed the confusion between the anal product, shit, and the vaginal product, babies.
We have also discussed that early maturation delay, when our ancestors were the equivalent of 2 year old infants now; when they yelled and learnt to tell lies. We have speculated that they made pretend ‘babies’ with their faeces, as they were denied real babies. And I suggest that the confusion between the anal product and the vaginal product dates from this time of maturation delay. There will have been confusion in the male mind, too, but the impact on the female ancestors was far more profound: they became conscious of the two bodily functions, which before that maturation delay had been taken for granted like eating or sneezing or any other bodily function.
Please remember that at the time of the maturation delay our ancestors were very young.
Money emphasises the confusion. Never mind for the moment what men are doing; by focussing on money as the primary aim of their protest, Feminism focusses on the anal product; and by their rage against men, Feminists have distanced themselves from the vaginal product; the social trend to having a first baby at a much later age than previous generations, bears this out.
The Maternal Instinct to Protect 4
The first Fruit of our labours here is that we know our difficulties and the resolution of our difficulties are within ourselves.
The second Fruit is a great affection for all humanity.
The third Fruit of our labours is the ability of women to fully enjoy the pleasures of the libido.
It is important that we do not confuse the libido merely with the survival and sexual instincts. Look at the other mammals: they aren’t having sex or struggling for survival all the time; most of the time, they are simply being within nature, within the libido.
But sexual activity is very important, and it is important that we enjoy the pleasure of sex.
The ways in which our ancestors responded to the ancient traumas, their fantasising, and the ways they misunderstood and misinterpreted of the behaviour of animals; the ways in which they became divorced from nature; all this has left us in confusion. We are all still badly affected, but women have the greater part of the burden.
We all long to be free, men and women both, and we all must work for our libration. And we must let nature be our guide.
Make it simple. Think of the children. When you do something ask yourself, ‘Is this good for nature?’ If the answer is, ‘No. This is bad for nature,’ then it is be bad for the children too.
An interesting problem is in the matter of petrol driven versus electric car. Some people have gone for an electric car - which is perhaps better for nature than using oil - but to power up the car, some of these people have concreted over their gardens - which is obviously not good for nature; concrete’s a killer. Personally, I’d say don’t have a car, and that decision would be much better for nature and for the children.
Let the garden - if you’re lucky enough to have a garden - let it grow wild. Just let it be. The rewards are great.
Make your decisions yourself, for your children and for nature. As we retune to nature, so we retune with ourselves.
The Money Puzzle 2
This difficulty that women specifically experience is due to an accident of the physical arrangement of women’s bodies. Men, of course, are not so vulnerable in this, although many men do have infantile ideas about the female body.
We must recognise that our early ancestors were very young psychologically; that the confusions they suffered have remained unresolved; and that women (and men) now are unknowingly influenced by what happened then.
Let us recap. Our early ancestors suffered maturation delay; from the behaviour of our two year old infants, we know that our ancestors resented the maturation delay - the yelling - and that they learnt to lie. We know that there is a high incidence of constipation among two year old infants now; this may suggest that our ancestors changed what they ate, but it also suggests a psycho-somatic (mind-body) response to maturation delay: the instinctive drive to reproduce was blocked by environmental conditions; our ancestors struggled to overcome the block, but could not, and this resulted in a confusion of the physical and psychological.
I am not clear that there is any specific taboo attached to the early maturation delay, though it does seem clear that our ancestors were very unhappy at this point in evolution, and emerging from the maturation delay, they would want to forget what had happened.
Early in this work, I suggest that they found gold and saw it as the ideal faeces of the goddess; suffering constipation and the psycho-somatic confusions, our ancestors identified with the ideal faeces. Here we have the origin of the equation money=shit.
Much later, at the fall of the late matriarchy following the last ice age, the women were in a very bad state, suffering psychologically and physically. We may well speculate that gold then became psychologically very important, and thus very valuable. The ideal faeces of the goddess was held up as an example of all that is good, specifically for women, and was prized and sought after.
The confusions of the early maturation delay collided with the, specifically female, trauma of the collapse of the late matriarchy; gold was introduced or reintroduced as an ideal, and was worshipped; and women have endured the unresolved and ongoing confusion.
It is very necessary for women, and for men, to be able to mentally separate the two physical functions which are in the female body. Both these physical functions are in a sense creative, but they are separate and distinct. We may say that the anus, for all of us, is a waste pipe; the waste product is released and then formed by natural processes into other matter. The vagina produces new human beings.
But we humans do make life difficult for ourselves. The reference to gold as the ideal faeces of the goddess, and the continuing emphasis on money, does not make it easier for women, and men, to psychologically separate the two functions of the female body; the huge importance we attach to money-shit makes it psychologically more difficult.
At the time of that first maturation delay, our ancestors were psychologically very young; and we may easily understand their confusions. At end of the last ice age, the matriarchs regressed to that earlier trauma, and again we may easily understand their confusions and difficulties.
However, we are growing up now, and it is important that we recognise the earlier confusions for what they are.
The Maternal Instinct to Protect 5
It’s a difficult one, isn’t it? I didn’t want to write it, and knew you wouldn’t like it; but the best protection against our difficulties is to face the traumas, expose the taboos and bring them to the light, so that we can examine, analyse and overcome the darkness that haunts us.
George Frankl talked of the cultural history of humanity; and we can trace most or perhaps all of our specifically human distresses to that point of our evolution, those points of our evolution which break through into consciousness in our infants even now.
It all goes back to then. The dietary and digestive problems, for instance, suffered by so many from anorexia to obesity, people who feel that their food is poison, or that there is not enough nourishment in the universe to fill the void, and strangely that sense that there is not enough food in the universe to fill the void is experienced by the starvelings as well as by the obese; intolerance of certain foods is not faddish, any more than allergic reactions are faddish, to the individuals suffering it is very real, and difficult. Anything you don’t understand, look to the phylogeny and you will find the origins of the mystery in the history of our evolution.
Frankl talked of the instinctual void, that we can never be quite sure of what is right. The other animals do not have this problem; they live within instinct and know instinctively what is good and what is not. But we, our ancestors, were shocked out of instinct, and we have struggled ever since trying to go our own way, outside instinct and we have made a mess. The natural world does have surprises for us, with floods and droughts, storms and wild fires, volcano, earthquake, meteorite strike and all the rest; the other animals try to avoid the worst, because often they can predict, but they go with it because they must; we try to fight, fools that we are, but we’ve lost our senses and can’t predict and so are taken by surprise by natural events. And we do the most stupid things; just one example, here in the UK, we build towns on flood plains, due probably to someone wanting to make money and not caring how. And though the natural world produces difficulties for us, we make our lives almost intolerably difficult even in good times.
And the over population. It’s not as if we haven’t been warned; if you care to read Genesis, you will see so many examples of family disasters from Cain and Abel right through, but we haven’t heeded the warning, though it’s very clear. Though I would strongly encourage all women, and men, to keep to the one child, it is not meant to be retrospective: if you have more than one child well so be it, but from now on it would surely be better to have one child per woman. The family disasters in Genesis are still being played out in our own time, and my observations show me that most siblings resent each other and are made miserable and angered by each other; and though my own personal experience might colour my observations, the one child family would soon reduce the human population and so lessen the negative impact of humanity on this beautiful planet; there would be fewer people who are less miserable and angry, fewer individual problems, more happy and optimistic individuals.
Morally speaking for me writing this work, the instinctual void has been most difficult, though I’ve had George Frankl’s instructions to guide me; but all through I have asked myself, ‘Can I say that?’ not because I’ve thought that what I’m saying is wrong, but because I haven’t wanted to upset you. Of course, if you are very offended by what I’ve written here, you can always cancel me, but we can’t cancel the facts, we can’t make the problems just go away; we must face and overcome our phylogenic difficulties.
And we can’t make reality go away, though we’ve been trying to do that since the cultural infancy of our species. What I’ve named the inner consciousness well may be instinct, which has never quite left us, despite our distrust of the natural world and of our own nature. We are fundamentally good, born good and loving, and instinct will guide us well. We must allow the inner consciousness to lead us. Just do it right and we’ll come through.
Those three questions on the home page here, I’ve answered as far as I have been able. Now we have the environmental questions. It seems clear to me that the best thing we as a species can do is to put the natural world first, and that natural world includes the babies and children; and though we adults seem to ourselves to be part of the natural world, our behaviours are so unnatural that we scarcely qualify as natural any more. We must, we need and the planet needs us to see ourselves as the protectors of the natural world, to look after the planet and all the life forms here.
The Maternal Instinct to Protect 6
The power of the mother is undimmed, even in Taliban controlled Afghanistan. And this is because the power of the mother is in the mind and understanding of the baby. In the baby’s understanding, the mother is all-powerful, so that in the baby’s understanding whatever is is caused by and has the approval of the mother.
In nature, the mother is the first teacher and guide of her baby. Nature provides overwhelming love between mother and baby. The baby is born good and loving and naturally loves the mother; but, as we have discussed here, the mother very often does not feel love for the baby, particularly when she suffers postnatal depression but in other circumstances too, the mother is in great emotional conflict and cannot feel love for her baby. The child, whether male or female, will become aware of this lack of love from the mother.
Where the adult men treat the women with brutality, the baby, whether male or female, will understand that this is what the mother has chosen. From the infant’s point of view, the mother has ‘told’ her husband to be oppressive. That is what the baby understands. In certain oppressive states, the baby grows up believing that women must be oppressed, because women want to be and have chosen to be oppressed. This belief becomes ‘the truth’ in the mind of the growing child and remains as ‘the truth’ in the adult. It is nonsense, of course: women do not want to be oppressed, but these fundamentalist societies are stuck in this infantile belief; and the oppression of women is the law.
Adult men are very much aware, though perhaps unconsciously, of the power of the mother, and some men are frightened of that maternal power. Even though the power of the mother is largely within the child’s mind and stays within the adult, the grown man remains afraid of her power. We will recognise that where the mother does not, cannot, or even dare not, love her baby, at some point the child will recognise that he is not loved and will be confused, resentful and angry.
The incel movement may come from this perception, and certainly there are ancient myths and legends of witch women overthrown by their menfolk who perceive themselves to be oppressed by the women, see The Social History of the Unconscious by George Frankl, chapter 5. We may recognise that violence by men against women is a product of the male fear of the power of women; women do not feel powerful, women often feel themselves to be disempowered, and it is tragic that feminism does not recognise the power of women, particularly the power of the mother, any mother.
Taliban spokesmen have said that they want a peaceful society under sharia law. I do know that under this harsh system of laws they will not have a happy society. We may speculate that underlying their stated aim of creating a peaceful society under sharia, the Taliban elders want to force Muslim mothers to be loving towards their husbands and sons, which of course won’t work: love cannot be forced from the enslaved.
The Maternal Instinct to Protect 7
George Frankl could tell the future. I cannot. He saw the backlash against feminism and told us, but even so I didn’t see it coming and now it’s here.
You have read Chapter 5 of Frankl’s TheSocial History of the Unconscious; you have learnt of the events in Ona land, when the men brought patriarchy to their people; you know how, and why they did so and you are perhaps beginning to understand that the Ona men were frightened.
Everything changes, everything stays the same. The names are different, the ways are perhaps different, but it’s still men and women engaged in a struggle, and the ghastly, vicious cycle of fear, anger and vengeance turns round and round. It is not inevitable, but we keep doing it.
A woman may be as talented as a man may be; women are as capable of being airline pilots, astronauts, brain surgeons, billionaires, if that’s what they want. But women can do something men cannot do: women can have babies, and that is where women’s power lies.
If you are a mother you can be very sure that your baby loves you. Your baby doesn’t know or care about money or status or your career; your baby knows love and your baby loves you.
Human beings are emotionally and psychologically fragile, vulnerable. We need reassurance. The baby needs to know that the mother accepts and values the his or her love. Nature provides overwhelming love in the mother for the baby; but we are a phylogenically damaged species, and many mothers do not feel love for their babies. However, the baby naturally assumes the maternal love, and as long as the baby feels its love is acceptable to the mother, the baby is happy. Be kind to your baby.
The only species that I can think of where the mother does not personally stay with her young is the sea turtle, though there must be other species. Spiders? But we are not turtles or spiders; we are descended from apes and mother apes personally attend to their young, they personally nurture, protect and teach their young. Money Feminism has changed the world, has put money at the centre of life; women are expected to leave their babies, to work for money to pay for child care; even if they don’t want to leave their babies, mothers must follow the fashion of what is child neglect.
Naturally the human baby needs the mother to be present, available, in reach. The baby and the growing child need the mother’s presence. That is a given in nature. When the mother is not present the baby doubts her love, doubts that its love is acceptable to her. Doubting its place in the mother’s affections, the baby and child will become confused and frightened, angry, perhaps very angry. The absence of the mother is a powerful and very hard lesson for the young. The confused, frightened, angry child might grow up into a confused, frightened and angry adult, very much in need of reassurance but finding no reassurance. There is a natural contract between mother and child; that contract has been fractured in human beings for ages; money Feminism has caused more and great damage to that natural contract.
Boko Haram, the Taliban, Isis-K, and other organisations and states which repress women, may be due to the reluctance of the men to let go of a stern patriarchy, though it is possible that the men in such states and organisations are reacting to what they must see as the threat of western Feminism.
In the west we can clearly see the backlash against money Feminism: the tragic Incel movement (and it would be wrong to dismiss Incel men as mere crazies, wrong and intellectually lazy, and we must not be intellectually lazy); the growing confusion in gender identity is another example of the effects of money Feminism. The Stonewall organisation has become increasingly antagonistic towards women, certainly here in the UK if not elsewhere. And there is the fashion of nasty behaviour of boys and young men towards girls and young women.
So the backlash is here, and women are pained and surprised. ‘What have we done to deserve this?’ Well, no one deserves to be repressed and bullied, even murdered simply because they are women. But we should not be surprised at the backlash.
Women, have your career, be a leading physicist, a businesswoman, concentrate your engergies on fulfilling your own potential, but if that is what you want to do, then do not have a child. There is a natural contract between mother and child, natural, inbuilt, provided by nature. Break that contract and there is damage to the child, and a backlash against women, not only against money Feminists but against all women, and girls, too.
Women are so powerful, and there is so much more that I could say around the effects, good and bad, of women’s uses of their power, but this is the kernel of the matter: women can change the world, make the world a better place in a way that men simply cannot; be kind to your baby, nurture, protect and teach your baby, accept your baby’s love and be with your baby and growing child.
And it is so beautiful, delightful to see the love the baby has for his or her mother.
The Maternal Instinct to Protect 8
A photo in yesterday’s paper shows Afghan women protesting in Herat. Brave women. They hold placards, one of which states: NO government can Survive without the Support of WOMEN.
The patriarchy which swept the world some time after the Thaw would never have survived without the willing support of women. Why would women support patriarchy? We have discussed the highly erratic behaviour of the Matriarchs at the end of the last ice age, 10,000 or 12,000 years ago. Everyone was afraid, including the Matriarchs, but their behaviour added to the terror. Though 10,000 or 12,000 years seems a long time, in terms of human development it is a mere moment ago and the horror of those times is still very much with us, part of our phylogeny, pushed into the unconscious but even now we feel it threatening to overwhelm us again. Patriarchy was a reaction to the behaviour of the terror-maddened Matriarchs.
Mothers and Daughters. Women supported the emerging patriarchy, and especially the daughter generation. Young girls now with angry mothers do not want to grow up to be angry mothers themselves. What is the case now was the case then. And because those times of the Thaw are part of our phylogeny, even mothers who aren’t especially angry may find that their daughters turn away from them. The girls and young women want to, are determined to, and know that they can do better than their mothers.
So, I want to say be kind. Men and women be kind to each other. Men be kind to your wives because being a mother can be very difficult. And to mothers especially, be kind to your baby, whether it is a boy or a girl. Be kind. It’s a long haul, being a human mother, the baby and growing child, even to adulthood, needs to know that the mother is there, available, a fixed and steady - and kind - point in the troubling, ridiculous civilisation we have made for ourselves.