Making the Future Female

CHILDREN

WOMANIFESTO – A PLAN TO SAVE HUMANITY


The Womanifesto is the philosophy underpinning the novel

DOG Sharon: The Future is Female 

The Womanifesto calls for a positive re-evaluation and adoption of what have traditionally been referred to as Female Values and Perspectives with a corresponding paradigm shift in human affairs.

By this we mean an emphasis on cooperation and community rather than competition and individualism, with society organised to protect its weakest members, namely children and the elderly.

In the present global economic system we are told there is no alternative to production being governed by the Market.

However there can be no production without people and people are created by reproduction.

Therefore whoever controls reproduction controls production and future human society.

This explains why religions and other bastions of male power have worked so hard to regulate and deny female sexuality.

These sad people kill to oppose abortion, fight against birth control and do anything to prevent children getting proper sex education.

The rulers need our children for their wars and as workers, but they don’t want to acknowledge the power of reproduction.

They can’t let the women speak out.

So they denigrate the Feminine and attack women because they’re scared.

When women manage reproduction, the risk posed by overpopulation – probably the biggest challenge facing humanity – will quickly diminish and our species will no longer threaten all other life on the planet.

If women see a future where their children will be working for slave wages or die in wars or starve or die of thirst – if women see this, they will refuse to bring more children into the world.

Why should women give birth to children in a society that abuses most of the people most of the time, a society that lets tens of thousands of kids die each and every day from preventable causes?

Women everywhere are demanding change, and will not be denied. The genie is truly out of the bottle.

The existing order is based on violence or the threat of violence. But as violence creates more violence this is obviously counterproductive.

Women and children suffer most from wars and crime, face sexual assault, domestic violence and constant harassment.

Violence in all its forms must become a thing of the past.

We’ll need new politics for this new society and we’re calling it Lowerarchy.

Everybody knows a hierarchy is a pyramid-like structure with power concentrated at the top. This model worked well for kings, emperors, presidents, prime ministers, warlords and tyrants of every kind, and when allied with military might, has allowed these dictators to dominate the vast majority of people for the last several thousand years.

Hierarchies are part of our heritage, but then so is cannibalism: both have no place in a modern egalitarian society.

Government has developed from the absolute rule of kings and is the means by which the few dominate the many – so is part of the problem not a solution.

Lowerarchy is the opposite of hierarchical organisation.

In the Lowerarchy there will be no need for leaders as there will be no nations to lead. Local people will decide for themselves how to live and manage resources.

Then artificial national boundaries can be dissolved, and with no nation states to defend, armies will become redundant so can safely be disbanded.

Likewise, security services can be dismantled as we would all be on the same side.

The alternative to the above?

Catastrophic overpopulation, continued unfettered competition and the commodification of everything, wholesale destruction of the natural world, mass extinctions, more pollution and greenhouse effects on the climate, a further widening of the gap between the rich and poor, loss of civil liberties, wars over resources, famines and the likely destruction of the species.

It’s time we changed the way we live –

Let’s make the Future Female!

READ THE NOVEL NOW


CREEPY JIMMY SAVILE IN CHILD ABUSE ALLEGATIONS – latest update


After the BBC claimed to be ‘horrified’ at allegations about Jimmy Savile and sex abuse, more women have come forward to add to the controversy.

Yet the media still call this abuser ‘Sir’

According to today’s UK Guardian, two women have come forward with further allegations of sexual abuse by Savile.

The BBC now says it will assist any police investigation.

One alleged victim waived her anonymity to describe how she and a friend were allegedly molested by the Jim’ll Fix It star in the 1970s when they were 14.

Pictures of victim of ‘Sir’ Jimmy Savile with him.

Dee Coles told ITV News that she and her friend were made to perform sex acts on Savile in a camper van when they were on holiday in Jersey.

“He didn’t seem like a stranger. He was on our telly every Saturday night. It was exciting being with someone on TV,” said Coles.

“But I felt immense panic as soon as the door locked. Afterwards, it was shame.”

Unbelievably, Michael Grade told Channel 4 News on Tuesday night that he heard rumours about Savile’s conduct while he was boss of BBC 1, but said any suggestion of a cover-up was ”ludicrous’.

Grade said he had fleetingly heard rumours, claiming: “There were question marks, certainly.” But he added: “I never heard anything that gave me cause to think we should investigate or do anything about it. There were questions, but the entertainment industry is awash on a sea of rumours.”

But as this Savile bloke had access to children and vulnerable people, Grade’s hand-wringing counts for nothing. If he had heard stuff he should have investigated and not stopped his own journalists from doing so properly.

 


The Crisis & Abusive Systems: Simon Cowell’s X-Factor as Metaphor


Pink at his best… funny, cutting and perceptive.


ARE MOST HUMANS PEDOPHILES?


One of my favourite words is NEOTENY

(I’m indebted to my friend at the excellent and highly informative Dear Kitty. Some blog for setting my chain of thoughts in motion for this article)

The word NEOTENY derives from the German word Neotenie, which in turn comes to us from a combination of two Greek words νέος (neos, meaning ‘young’) and τείνειν (teínein, meaning ‘tending to’)

NEOTENY is defined as: the retention, by adults in a species, of traits previously seen only in juveniles and is a subject studied in the field of developmental biology. It is also called pedomorphosis. 

Many prominent evolutionary theorists, including Stephen Jay Gould and J.B.S. Haldane argue that neoteny has been a key feature in human evolution. See Wikipedia for more details.

These are the more obvious neotenous traits in humans: flattened face, broadened face, large brain, mostly hairless body, hairless face, small nose, reduction of brow ridge, small teeth, small upper jaw (maxilla), small lower jaw (mandible), thinness of skull bones,  limbs proportionately short compared to torso length, longer leg than arm length, larger eyes, and upright stance. 

So what are the effects of these neotenous changes?

In a cross-cultural study, more neotenized female faces were found to be the most attractive to men while less neotenized female faces were the least attractive, regardless of the females’ actual age. Michael R. Cunningham found that the Asian, Hispanic and White female faces that tended to be considered most attractive were those that had “neonate large eyes, greater distance between eyes, and small noses”.

This led Cunningham to conclude that “large eyes” were the most “effective” of the “neonate cues”.

Jones, D. Sexual Selection, Physical Attractiveness and Facial Neoteny: Cross-Cultural Evidence and Implications. p.723.

Now if these research findings are true, doesn’t this have profound implications for our society, and especially the way we demonise men, and some women, who are sexually drawn to young people and children?

I’m certainly not condoning pedophilia – I suffered sexual abuse as a kid so I know only too well how destructive of young lives this illness can be.

But I think we need to ask some searching questions of ourselves, both as a society and as a species.

Not surprisingly, one of my least favourite words is

PEDOPHILE

PEDOPHILE is defined as an adult who is sexually attracted to young children. The word derives from two Greek words, paidos meaning a boy or child and phileein meaning to love.

The word PEDOPHILE is a term of abuse for many nowadays, yet much of our culture seems to focus on us looking like children. Has anyone else noticed this contradiction?

Fashion models are notorious for being extremely thin, yet what is this but an attempt to appear as pre-pubescent?

And what about Manga?

The great majority of mature women shave their legs and under their arms, pluck their eyebrows and other parts of their faces, use creams and potions to stave off or reverse the aging process, wear make-up to make the skin appear smoother and younger and try in many other ways to appear young.

What is this all about, if not to appear childlike? And if this is the case, shouldn’t we be talking about it?

So what do YOU think?

Are YOU drawn to younger-looking people? Is this natural, or is it created by marketing and advertising?

Do YOU want to appear younger than you really are?

If so, why?

If not, how do YOU feel about this process?


CREEPY JIMMY SAVILE IN CHILD ABUSE ALLEGATIONS


News broke today that creepy former Radio 1 deejay and television presenter Jimmy Savile was interviewed under caution by Surrey police in 2007 about sexual assault allegations dating back to the 1970s.

However, the force dropped its 2007 investigation after the Crown Prosecution Service advised that there was insufficient evidence for a prosecution, the force said on Monday.

The development came to light after up to 10 women told a documentary they were assaulted by the Jim’ll Fix It frontman, who died last year.

The supposed ‘lack of evidence’ can be read to mean Savile was rich and connected to powerful figures, as a former BBC presenter says she actually caught him abusing a young girl.

Broadcaster Paul Gambaccini has added to the claims that Savile sexually abused schoolchildren, claiming the star used his charity work and ‘imperial personality’ within show business to prevent his private life being exposed.

Speaking ahead of a forthcoming ITV documentary that claims Savile abused schoolgirls during his many years of stardom, Gambaccini said his former Radio 1 colleague played tabloid newspapers “like a Stradivarius” in order to keep the abuse secret.

Now the BBC is under pressure to explain why it stopped an investigation by it’s own journalists. 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9577087/Sir-Jimmy-Savile-sex-abuse-claims-ITV-goes-where-BBC-fears-to-tread.html

Late last year the BBC decided to drop a Newsnight item investigating allegations of sexual abuse by Savile, who died last October aged 84, leading to accusations the piece was ‘killed’ to spare the Corporation’s reputation. Instead, two tribute programmes celebrating his BBC career were aired.

However, a BBC spokesman said no evidence of any allegations of misconduct had ever been found in its files, so it was “simply not possible for the Corporation to take any further action”.


EQUAL BUT DIFFERENT


DO YOU BELIEVE IN EQUALITY?

Nowadays we talk about ‘equality’ and ‘everyone being born equal’, but what exactly do we mean?

We speak of ‘equality of opportunity’ and ‘equality under the law’ but if we are unsure about the concept of ‘equality’ in the first place then these phrases don’t mean a whole lot.

People have said to me, “But humans are different, so how can they be equal?” or “We have to have difference – it’s just natural” and “I’d hate it if everybody was the same…”

These arguments are mistaking ‘Equality’ for ‘similarity’ or ‘sameness’. This kind of mistaken thinking is often a cover for discriminatory practices.

These arguments take the form of;

Women are different to men, so they shouldn’t earn as much as males,

or

Black folk are different to Europeans so it’s alright to enslave them.

But different doesn’t mean inferior.

Obviously there are differences between people, but there is no intrinsic reason why that should preclude equality.

Equality means everyone has the same right of respect from other individuals and to be treated fairly by social institutions.

Equality means we all have the same right to self-expression, self-determination and the chance to live and grow. Clearly there is a long way to go to achieve this.

What we are saying can be summed up by the phrase, “Equal but different…”

Click here to listen to the brilliant Au Pairs sing about this idea.

Our diversity is our strength, not an opportunity to discriminate against others.

Although the majority of us live in modern societies that claim to be democracies, there are plenty of old ideas still circulating that hark back to the pre-democratic systems that promoted inequality.

These hierarchical systems of social organisation are the biggest obstacles to developing truly modern societies where everyone has an equal stake and input into all aspects of life.

It’s worth briefly examining the ideas that were used to justify inequality in the past.

The Great Chain of Being 

(Latin; scala naturae, literally “ladder or stairway of nature”) was a concept derived from Plato and Aristotle and developed more fully in Neoplatonism. 

The Chain charts a fixed hierarchical structure of all matter and life. 

The chain starts from God and progresses downward to angels, demons, fallen and renegade angels, stars,            the Moon, kings, princes, nobles, men, wild animals, domesticated animals, trees, other plants, precious stones, precious metals, and other minerals.

Each link in the chain could be divided further into its component parts.

In medieval feudal society, the king was at the top, succeeded by the aristocratic lords, next came the merchants and then the peasants below them.

Solidifying the king’s position at the top of humanity’s social order is the doctrine of the Divine right of Kings.

In the family, the father was considered head of the household; below him came his wife; below her, their children.

This mistaken notion that some are more important than others underpins racist and sexist thinking, and that some nations can dominate other countries.

While there are small differences between people of various races, there is more divergence within each race than with other races.

However, there are marked differences between the sexes – this is called Sexual Dimorphism.

Men and women have different bodies statistically, meaning men tend to be taller and heavier with more muscle than women. However individuals may not display these attributes – some women are taller than some men for instance.

Crucially, modern research points to differences in brain organisation and processing systems, and I think this is really important.

Men and women think differently yet this isn’t taken into account in education and other aspects of life.

In my next post I will examine these differences in more detail.


IGNORING THE HIERARCHICAL SYSTEM…


DON’T FIGHT THE SYSTEM – IGNORE IT!

The Max Keiser show, On The Edge, was really good this week and the guest Mike Ruppert from collapsenet.com explained clearly the ideas behind my novel DOG Sharon: The Future is Female and the related Womanifesto!

Mike Ruppert is an interesting character with plenty to say about the state of the human world. He’s advocating growing your own food, getting together and building local partnerships, and ignoring the authorities as much as possible. He suggests we let ’em sink in their own incompetence, because their business model has failed.

A paradigm shift in human consciousness is needed to move onwards and upwards. But it’s no good tinkering with the system or looking to leaders.

EVERYBODY IN EVERY GOVERNMENT IS OUT OF THEIR MINDS – THERE’S A TOTAL DISCONNECT WITH REALITY!  Mike Ruppert

The inequality of the current economic system has developed from the idea that all the lands of the Earth and all the peoples are just commodities that may be owned by a small elite.

This hierarchical system can be easily visualised as a pyramid with a king, emperor, prime minister, president, priest, pope, patriarch, imam, ayatollah, shah, csar or tyrant on the top and everyone else beneath.

Below the kings come the nobles and below them the middle classes. Of course, the bottom tier is by far the largest as it is made up of the working masses.

Without the masses the elites would be at the bottom, so they need lots of new workers.

Shit comes down, money and power flows up.

It’s a brilliant idea – if you’re near the top.

But, most of us are at the bottom.

In the shit.

Lowerarchy is the opposite of Hierarchy 😉

As more and more of us see through the illusion of control a tipping point of consciousness will be reached which will allow everyone else to make that leap.

That’s the paradigm shift.

The only way is up…