Female supremacism, part 2 of 4
Tunia via channel A. S.
Posted on July 5, 2025
My dearest brothers and sisters,
This is Tunia speaking. I love you so very much.
Last week, in the message titled "female supremacism, part 1 of 4", I argued that your society is female supremacist.
In summary, I said that the following is textbook white supremacism:
"white people are better in a dozen ways than black people. Black people are better in no way except for some purely physical things."
And I showed that your society says the following:
"women are better in a dozen ways than men. Men are better in no way except for some purely physical things."
Therefore your society is female supremacist.
Okay, so saying "women are better in a dozen ways than men. Men are better in no way except for some purely physical things" is female supremacism. Then what should we say instead?
Well logically speaking there are three alternative options that we can use if we don't want to be female supremacist. We'll look at each of them in turn:
Option one: even if you zoom in on specific areas, there isn't a single area in which either men or women are better than the other
This option doesn't work because it's not true, and also deep down no one believes it's true.
Even people who claim to believe this, don't actually believe it deep down.
At most, this option is a kind of double-think idea that lives in some people's minds while at the same time they believe that women are better in some ways.
So basically, the people who claim to believe this really believe "both genders are equal, but one is more equal than the other."
Specifically, here's an incomplete list of ways in which women are better than men:
No one actually believes that women are just as likely to rape and commit violent crime as men are.
No one actually believes that very small children need their father just as much as they need their mother.
No one actually believes that women are just as likely as men to take stupid, pointless risks.
Women are also clearly better at reading people and at being focused on caretaking.
Women are more concerned with people, are more in tune with their emotions and are less likely to use cold, psychopathic, inhumane logic.
As caretaking-focused people, women are more keenly aware that a society isn't that great if it has good GDP numbers and good stock market performance, but most people are getting crushed economically.
(Admittedly at your current level of consciousness there isn't a system that works well and isn't horrible. The solution is collectively raising your consciousness, and then non-coercive politics starts working. Still, women are right to point out that a society with billionaires and beggars is horrifying and dystopian.)
Women are also more spiritually talented in general, although it depends on the specific kind of spirituality. For example, women are better at being mediums, but aren't better at the very rational, scholarly parts of spirituality. Still, in general women are more talented spiritually.
Women's greater spiritual talent isn't a minor point. It is going to become more and more important in the future, as Earth opens up.
Women are also better at using sexual energy -- not just to create babies, but women can also do impressive magick or great lightwork or achieve great spiritual growth or heal through sex. Men can also do that, but not to the same degree.
If a pupil spends a week with a female spiritual teacher who is willing and skilled at using sex to help her pupil grow spiritually, then that pupil would grow an unbelievable amount from that. Of course women don't have to do that, but this is an ability that women have.
Why do you think the dark controllers have always sought to control female sexuality?
Female sexuality is a superpower.
Personally I like sex, and talk about it relatively often, for more reasons than just hedonism.
You think connection and pleasure is all that I accomplish in the bedroom?
Returning to the main topic: another way in which women are better is that they're less likely to have sex with their subordinates.
Arguably women are more love-oriented.
Arguably women are more concerned with protecting and not destroying nature.
This is not a complete list.
But it's very clear that no one actually believes that women aren't better in any way than men are. See the previous list.
Everyone knows that women are better in some ways than men are.
So this first option doesn't work. Let's look at the other two options.
Option two: women are better in certain substantial ways, and men are better in certain minor ways
Option two correctly acknowledges that women are better in some substantial ways than men (see the previous list). And it tries to balance that out by saying that men are better in some minor ways. So let's say, we acknowledge that men are physically stronger and better at doing handymen and repair work (because they're more object-focused) and men have slightly better spatial reasoning.
One problem with this is that if we'd say "white people are better in lots of substantial ways, while black people are good as handymen and as athletes"... well that still sounds like horrendous white supremacism, right? Which means that this second option is still female supremacy.
Moreover, assume you have two equally qualified candidates for a CEO position. And your worldview is that men are physically stronger and are good handymen and have better spatial reasoning (all irrelevant for a CEO position), while women are better in several ways, such as being better at reading people (relevant) and being less likely to have sex with a subordinate (relevant) and being less likely to take stupid pointless risks (very relevant).
Okay, so then it would be rational for you to quietly discriminate against the man and hire the woman, just because she's a woman. It may even be rational for you to hire a slightly less qualified woman if this is how you look at the world.
Similarly, if women are just generally better except for a few small details, then as a society it makes economic sense to have women-only scholarships while already more women attend university. Even though that's clearly discriminatory. Why? Because we believe that women are overall better, so we want higher positions to be mostly filled with women.
Frankly, under this option two it's rational to discriminate against men.
Also, if Western couples undergo in vitro fertilisation and they're legally allowed to choose the sex of the embryo, then they tend to choose girls nowadays.
And why not? If women have substantial advantages, and men are only stronger and better at being handymen and better at spatial reasoning, then why wouldn't you want a daughter rather than a son? It sounds horrible, but it's rational behavior if you think that women are better in substantial ways while men are only better in minor ways.
Another issue here is that even if we look at one of the few areas in which men are better according to this option, people still aren't willing to accept that men are actually better in those few areas.
For example, while your society is willing to acknowledge that men are more object-oriented, they're not willing to acknowledge that men in general are better handymen. "Judge the individual", they say, while also saying that women are better in 50 ways than men (as we discussed last week).
As another example, we said that men have better spatial ability. So are people willing to say that men are better drivers? No, they're not.
Typically you'll hear that men might have better spatial reasoning, but women are just more responsible overall and less likely to take stupid risks, and therefore women are at least as good drivers as men.
But then option two boils down to "women have general advantages that help them with everything, and men have a few minor advantages like spatial reasoning that only help them in specific situations, and even in those specific situations women may be at least as good as men due to women's general advantages."
Or more concisely: "women are better at almost everything, and merely as good as men at a few specific things."
Okay, so this option two is still female supremacism.
Another problem is that this second option just simply isn't true. If women are so superior at everything, then how come all successful historical societies have been led by men?
Female-led societies existed historically, they just didn't do well.
You haven't heard about them because they didn't do well (and because it goes against the narrative).
This contradicts the idea that women are just generally better at everything except for a few minor things.
Also, note that your Western society now has far more female bosses and leaders and politicians than it did historically, and also your society has begun declining.
Sure, correlation doesn't prove causation, but at the very least this doesn't seem to point in the direction of women being substantially better in lots of ways and men only being better in some minor ways.
Moreover, women are generally biased in favor of women, yet even women typically prefer to be led by men (if they haven't been brainwashed by "men are thrash" propaganda). Doesn't that also contradict the idea that women are just better at everything?
Then consider that even in the present, all the best chess players are men.
Even in the present, something like 80% of new inventions are done by men.
Even in the present, something like 80% of new companies are started by men.
And that's in the context of a society that's hostile to men and actively trying to help women (including in some ways that are discriminatory against men).
So it's clearly not true that women have substantial advantages over men while men are only better in a few minor ways. (Plus, that position is still female supremacism.)
Now I'm not saying women don't have any qualities. I stand by the list I shared earlier in this message. Women really are substantially better than men in several ways.
The part that's untrue is the part where it says "... while men are better in only a few minor ways."
So then we're only left with option three:
Option three: women are better in certain substantial ways, and men are better in certain substantial ways
If we don't want to be female supremacists and have a worldview that makes it rational to preferentially hire women just because they're women, then this is the only option. We've already debunked the other two possible options.
Fortunately, this third option is also true.
This third option is: overall men and women have equal value. And women are better in certain substantial ways. And men, too, are better in certain substantial (not just minor) ways. And society flourishes when men and women harmoniously work together, each contributing their skills and qualities.
In the last two parts we'll discuss a few specific ways in which men are better.
So to not be a female supremacist, you need to have certain "men on average are better in this way than women" positions that are true, yet that your society labels as misogynist.
Personally, I don't think it's misogyny to say that men are better in some ways and women are better in some ways.
Meanwhile, if you have the so-called "correct" positions on gender according to your society, then in reality you likely have female supremacist views.
Yes, pretty much everything is upside-down in your society.
From my perspective: saying "men and women are both better in some substantial ways" isn't sexist.
Rather, it's the "women are better in a dozen ways, while men are better at nothing" society you grew up in that's sexist.
I know that your society likes to hide behind "according to us, men and women are equal", but again no one actually believes that. What people who claim this actually believe is "both genders are equal, but one is more equal than the other."
To be clear though: obviously some statements that your society labels as misogyny are indeed just simply false. I'm not saying "every single statement that your society says is misogynist is in fact true."
Women are good for more than housework, sex and children.
Women should have full rights (including voting).
Women shouldn't be locked in the kitchen and women shouldn't be banned from certain positions.
People should be treated as individuals rather than as representatives of a certain gender.
Just because one gender is on average better at something, doesn't mean that everyone of that gender is better than everyone of the other gender.
Still. You have to acknowledge that men are better than women in certain substantial ways if you don't want to end up with a viewpoint that's both untrue and female supremacist, as we've shown.
The blunt truth is, pretty much everyone already knows deep down that men are better in certain ways than women. People are just not willing (or socially allowed) to say that. But such a massive collectively suppressed truth is going to do a great deal of harm, as you're seeing in your society.
It's only because people already know that men are better in certain ways that you have both men and women often tolerating systemic pro-female anti-male discrimination.
Some people might think that the current situation is alright and that we shouldn't rock the boat and we shouldn't start making arguments that men are better in some ways than women.
However, from my perspective those people don't truly understand just how awful men are being treated, and how much a lot of men are silently suffering. Which is of course horrible in itself. And also, that makes society much worse for everyone, including women.
There are street interviews where women are asked what men are good for, and they answer things like "making women uncomfortable" and "not a lot."
Well, if people genuinely believe that men have no gender-specific qualities, and women do have lots of gender-specific qualities, and men do almost all of the violence and the raping... then it's completely rational to think that men are the problem in society, and that men aren't good for anything.
That may sound horrible, but it's simply the logical conclusion if you think that women have gender-specific qualities while men don't, and men do the violence and raping.
So to avoid ending up in a truly awful place, you have to acknowledge that men are better in certain substantial ways. Plus, that is just simply true.
And it's actually great that men are better in certain ways than women, because men can hugely contribute to society in those ways. Especially if you don't crush men and tell them they're awful all their lives.
I get that many women are afraid of being oppressed by men, but one: much of that oppression was actually done by hostile galactics and not by Earth men, and two: at present there really isn't an appetite among men to oppress women. Sure, some men think like that, but they'll be shouted down by both men and women and they won't get their way.
A possible counterargument to "men aren't going to oppress women" is abortion being illegal in some places in the US. However, one, not everyone would agree that an abortion ban is oppression. Two, note that 2024 Pew Research said that 39% of US men think abortion should be illegal in most or all cases, and so do 35% of US women.
So despite the narrative, this really isn't a case of men oppressing women. After all, almost as many women as men are anti-abortion.
Other than that topic, at present there really isn't a plausible scenario that leads to men oppressing women.
People might fear that this series will lead to some men wanting to dominate women and chain them to the kitchen. However the vast, vast majority of men don't want that.
Plus, it's not news to men that they're better in some ways than women. I'm only telling men what they already know. Just because they haven't been allowed to publicly say this, doesn't mean that they don't already know this.
Frankly, I suspect that some men (and some women) are wondering right now why I'm spending so many words arguing that your sky is blue.
The very few men who do want to chain women to the kitchen had that view even before they read this message. In fact I explicitly speak out in this message against chaining women to the kitchen.
Awful men are going to be awful regardless. And if you treat men fairly and you allow them to speak and you don't force them to live under female supremacism, then good men will in fact make society better. Including for women.
Because how's your current society working out?
New Earth can only be built hand in hand with men.
So long as a not insignificant group of women continue discriminating against men and continue trying to keep men down and continue the narrative of "us women are better than you men in a dozen ways and you're better at nothing", then New Earth can't be built.
Obviously not all women do that. The point of this series isn't "women are bad." They're not.
Yes, sometimes I am going to point out that some women behave in a bad way, but then again some men also behave in bad ways, as everyone already knows. That makes neither men, nor women bad overall.
The problem isn't women. The problem is female supremacism.
Or, if you prefer, the problem is women's unsafety and men's lack of being loved that together led to female supremacism, as I described in part one of this series.
I get that women are afraid. But keeping men down will only make things worse, because all you're accomplishing is that you're keeping the good men down, while the awful men are awful regardless.
Perhaps the statement that men are better than women in some substantial ways doesn't feel right to you. However keep in mind that most people buy into the worldview they were taught as a child, even if it's a horrible one. And most likely you were brought up with female supremacism.
Most white people who were brought up in past racist societies had horrible views about black people. It would be a very rare white person indeed who was brought up in such a society who didn't have horrible views about black people. Yes there were a couple, but most people aren't the exception.
Most people initially just have the beliefs they were brought up with. And those beliefs seem normal and fine or at least tolerable to them, even if they're really not.
Overcoming those beliefs is uncomfortable. But also, it is very much worth doing.
So in summary, my argument so far is: "your society is female supremacist, and to stop that we have to acknowledge the obvious truth that men are better in certain substantial ways, just as women are better in certain substantial ways."
So, that was today's message.
Next week we'll have an unrelated channeling from another galactic so that we're not constantly talking about this one topic, and then the two weeks after that we'll finish this series.
I'm curious to hear in the comment section what you're feeling or thinking, if you want to share.
Thank you for your open-mindedness and your courage to read a controversial, counter-cultural message.
With all my love and my deep respect,
Your star sister,
My notes: - God the Source is unconditional love, not a zealous god of [some] dogmatic religions.
- All articles are the responsibility of the respective authors.
- My personal opinion: Nobody is more Anti-Semite than the Zionists.
Reminder discernment is recommendedfrom the heart, not from the mind The Truth Within Us, Will Set Us Free. We Are ONE.No Need of Dogmatic Religions, Political Parties, and Dogmatic Science, linked to a Dark Cabal that Divides to Reign.Any investigation of a Genuine TRUTH will confirm IT. TRUTH need no protection. Question: Why the (fanatics) Zionists are so afraid of any Holocaust investigations?
- God the Source is unconditional love, not a zealous god of [some] dogmatic religions.
- All articles are the responsibility of the respective authors.
- My personal opinion: Nobody is more Anti-Semite than the Zionists.
No comments:
Post a Comment