How Should Humanity Steer the Future ? by Margriet Anne O\'Regan

Margriet O'Regan

Essay Abstract

I have drawn the recommendations I present in my essay from evolutionary biology which latter,I believe, is quite clear on the direction we should steer ourselves if we are to avoid now almost certain omnicidal oblivion. The evolutionary law which governs the relationship between the sexes goes as follows : "Evolutionary viability as critically relies on female centrality//male marginality as it does on the availability of sufficient & suitable subsistence resources". This law obtains simply enough due to females' definitively greater contribution to primary reproduction. If females do not have an existential position of 'centrality' vis a vis the males of their species - which is presently the case in our own circumstance - reproductively active females (our womenfolk) will be unable to optimise their primary reproductive enterprise, under which circumstance the species will inexorably devolve. I believe this is precisely our own predicament at this present time, so the recommendation from evolutionary biology is clear. We must 're-centralise' women in order that they may first relearn how, & then carry out their all-important primary reproductive work at its optimal level - which 'level' is, not at all so incidentally, NOT the largest number of children possible. Far from it, but rather that our mothers will bring our children into this world at more or less exactly the carrying capacity of our evolutionnarily normal socio-ecological milieu, doing so not only entirely free from male domination or direction, but rather with the latter's enthusiastic & unquestioning help & support. Anthropological studies suggest that during prehistory we lived in matrilineal clans in which women were afforded a centrality they have not enjoyed for upwards of roughly 8 - 10,000 years. Unless we reverse the relationship currently existing between the sexes, we're doomed. This, I believe, is the clarion call from evolutionary biology.

Author Bio

I am a 70 yr old amateur Antipodean truth-seeker & an avid nature lover despairing at our present wanton destruction of our once glorious planetary home. I have an unquenchable curiosity for 'life, the universe & everything' & my search for answers eventually led me to evolutionary biology. As you will see in my essay, my interpretation of evolutionary biology & the answers I believe I found therein - & more importantly as evidenced in the natural world at large, are highly unconventional to say the least !

Download Essay PDF File

James Dunn

I disagree. I know of men that are as emotionally and rationally connected to their children and society as any woman. Also, I know of women who abandoned their children, neglected and had their children taken from them ...

However, rational people regardless of gender have a better chance of making broadly considered decisions. Look at Sweden and Norway; these are female dominated countries. The police, lawyers, judges, politicians, company CEO's, ... will likely be women. Their countries are socialist and they live a good life. But the main difference is that the parents and schools teach students how to share respect; it's part of their culture.

quote: "We all know that if we all loved one another - as well as our once glorious Planetary Home - as we could & should, there would be no problems.

If we all loved one another we would take care of each other not hurt & destroy each other or our precious environment. 'Patriarchy' has been called 'the world historic defeat of woman'. But that doesn't say it all, for to defeat woman is to annihilate mothering.

The only source of earthly love is a mother's arms. More accurately, the only source of earthly love are the arms of a truly loving, happy, confident, competent mother - one who desires her child.

As difficult as it may be we must re-centralise women; elevate, re-centralise & support mothers. There is no other viable choice. Mothering must been seen to be the most important & most sacred task on Earth, & we must see to it that women have everything they require in order to accomplish this all important work of loving their children."

I just know of too many contradictions to these statements. Most women are not innately thoughtful and nurturing. They are taught. Most men are not innately arrogant (self-serving and loathing of others), they are taught. Through useful education we can teach sharing respect and being able to work together to move collectively in support of diverse needs towards a sustainable future.

To reduce the population requires not having as many babies. Women are so much more and more diverse than what you describe; as are men.

[deleted]

Hi Margriet,

strong views and clear vision, a novel approach to the question.

A few things I disagree with, one is the health long term of a fruitarian diet. Without care it is deficient in a number of nutrients and is high in fructose, that is bad for the body in excess. Not recommended for pregnant women, or children because the foetus and children require all the necessary nutrients for growth and development.

I also think that in most developed countries we have got beyond regarding women as purely for breeding, though not beyond disrespect especially in a number of music genres and music industry videos where blatant sexism is touted. More and more women are choosing to be child free because of the freedom, career opportunities and lifestyle being child free allows.

Even a lion can tell the difference between his own offspring and those of his rival. The rival's offspring he is likely to kill though he will tolerate and protect his own. So I am skeptical about the ignorance of uneducated people regarding the consequences of the sex act.

The idea of having extended families raising children is good. That still happens in some communities. They exist alongside the western culture of nuclear families and variations such as blended families, step families and single parent families. There is no reason why the nuclear family should be regarded as ideal.As you point out a mother is able to access more help and support with extended family around her.

Kind regards, Georgina

[deleted]

Georgina, I just wanted to add that we primates are mostly designed to eat leaves and fruit, with the occasional extra fatty something-or-other (animal or vegetable). So I'd agree that just fruit would make us at least somewhat deficient. But a raw fruit diet is probably a while lot better than what most folks eat right now! Best is most likely a raw diet primarily of leafy greens, plus fruits and veggies and nuts/seeds, with the occasional anything else one feels one really wants. No deprivation necessary (since raw plant matter fills us up really well, both calorically and nutritionally), while also getting the most health and happiness.

Turil Cronburg

Um... That was me right up there. It's never logged me out like that before! (Though I've heard others mention the problem...)

[deleted]

Hi Georgina & Turil !!!

Thank you both for taking up & commenting of some of the threads in my essay - I've left replying to you literally to the last few minutes - it's already June 7 over here in Australia !!

As it will take nothing less than a full book to present the science of 'female centrality' (it's way past 'an hypothesis') I should delay no further & get on with it, but the simple facts are males are EXTREMELY problematic within the entire biosphere & there are only a few ways nature has been able to curb their disruptiveness - all of which stems from them trying - via any means fair or foul - to get as many genes into as many eggs as they can.

The most widely utilised method nature employs to deal with males is just wipe them out as soon as the mating season is over whether they have mated or not.

The next most common way is to leave them alive but have alpha males drive all of the young ones out of the FEMALE-OWNED territory, where the marginalized young males suffer extremely high rates of mortality through starvation, exposure, predation & disease...

Another way is to just have each of the sexes live in entirely different kinds of habitats for all of the off-mating season periods of the year. Many male goats & sheep live higher up the mountains during most of the year where fodder is much rougher, courser & harder to find.

Of course one of nature's most notorious methods is to just get males to kill each other off in bouts of mortal combat - & in us humans, wars. All sports are ritualised & usually non-lethal ways of intra-male combat.

One of nature's most benign ways is to 'turn' males into 'entertainers' - rather than kill them off. Nature dresses many, many of its males in very fancy costumes indeed, many of which so accoutred males also sing with the most melodious of melodies, dance with the most entrancing of steps & rhythms.

Nature also turns some males into the most extraordinary artists & architects. In addition to the human male, think here of the Australian Bower bird male who builds & paints & lavishly decorates his bower (& dances & sings & fights off rivals & steals from other males' bowers...)

No one seems to notice that 'eggs' are not just more highly provisioned (with yolks & other nutrients - water, gases, etc) strips of DNA, BUT are quite literally LIFE ITSELF. Eggs are fully living cells & are that alone which possess everything required to build a new organism. Sperms are just DNA transport packages - & they are NOT EVEN ALIVE !!!!!!! This 'eggs-r-it' factor is why nature MUST protect females - this is why egg-makers/egg-carriers MUST enjoy full centrality vis a vis all males of their species.

As I say in my essay females not only evolve all of the equipment for primary reproduction but under all evolutionarily normal circumstances, all of the necessary know-how to deploy that equipment up to its optimum potential, too.

Males never do.

There is one area or realm of being where males have 'right of way' & full use thereof, & this area/realm is very easy to delineate as it is 'anywhere or anything that females do NOT require to discharge their all-important primary reproductive/subsistence work'.

Into this 'survivally useless realm' males can sally forth & appropriate anything they want. Deserts, oceans, ice flows, moons etc, etc, etc. Which a review of our own history reveals men have done with gusto. Again it is to be recognized that this area is the survivally useless one that females do not want to use for any of their survival &/or reproductive work.

Have you ever wondered why the 'nuptil gifts' (courtship offerings & behaviours) men proffer to women are such completely everyday-survivally-useless, wholly impractica, things like gold, precious stones, exquisite jewellry, even bouquettes of glorious flowers - none of which can be eaten - or worn to keep one warm.

Now then, I hear you saying, well what about fur coats & lavish houses, chocolates & expensive meals. All survivally/subsistently very useful, you insist.

Ah ha !!! These kinds of quasi-subsistently valuable gifts are not procured from our everyday subsistence resources. They are way, way in excess thereof.

We all 'talk' - communicate with verbal sounds. Poets & musicians take this kind of communication to its wondrous-but-survivally-useless extreme.

We are all intelligent (a gift mothers gave to their young) but (some) men are way excessively more 'intelligent' than others. BUT when males insist that not only are they more intelligent than women so much so that they must be in charge & make all the decisions - PARTICULARLY AS REGARDS ANY OR ALL SUBSISTENCE RESOURCES MANAGEMENT & ALLOCATION & equally AS REGARDS ANYTHING TO DO WITH PRIMARY REPRODUCTION, at precisely those points do they regroup back away from their own 'useles (but sometimes pretty) realm of intelligent excess' & reinvade areas of 'female centrality' - on which latter nothing less than the evolutionary destiny of our entire species depends.

One reason I'm mentioning all this is to suggest - actually insist !! (pardon me) - that bearing & raising a happy, healthy, fulfilled human beings is the most difficult & most demanding - & potetnially most rewarding - job on the Planet, & there is nothing men can do to even remotely approach it.

Being 'childfree' to pursue a career in any non-central area is to not only abdicate the highest office in the land but to descend into the male arena of 'enforced uselessness' which they otherwise valiantly attempt to elevate to a level above the 'mere' subsistence/primary reproductive one, & to further reinvade the all-female realm - otherwise the most sacrosanct one of all.

Feminists have done us all the greatest of disservice in not understanding that mothering is the greatest & most rewarding job on Earth.

Biologists like-wise have done us the greatest of disservice by not alerting us to the fact that evolutionary viability as critically depends on female centrality as it does on the availability of sufficient & suitable subsistence resources.

Oops - I'm a tad strident aren't I, sorry.

We all deserve to flourish.

Actually the truth is men not only have the perfect excuse for being what they are - but a way of fully redeeming themselves - & saving the entire planet as they do so. If you'd really like to hear more of my science of female centrality email me at margrietanne@hotmail.com.

Much love,

Margriet Anne O'Regan

Georgina Woodward

Turil,

agreed it is better short term than the standard american diet. Food for thought High fat nutrition There are a great manner articles on the hyperlipid site, many looking at flawed conclusions from scientific experiments.

Interesting use of ketogenuc diet to fight cancer

Joe Fisher

Dear Ms. O'Regan,

Your exceptionally well written essay was utterly fascinating, and I do hope that it does well in the competition. Since I retired in 1997, I make sure to eat a bowl of fruit topped with a scoop of vanilla ice-cream before I go to bed. I am in better health now than I was when I was a lot younger.

With my highest regards,

Joe Fisher

Peter Jackson

Margriet,

Well I didn't see that one coming! There's everyone busy discussing how to have far less children and stop population growth, indeed reduce it dramatically, and up you pop with the other viewpoint! What a return to Earth with a bump.

After consideration I've decided, speaking as a man (never tried otherwise - though Tom suggested literal transvesticism!) that I have no problem with your proposals at all! Once we start populating the Local Group I (I fancy Andromeda) we'll need to get the populus up.

Can I have a few caveats; To ensure women get a good supply of the best fruit and veg I'll limit myself mainly to carbs, meat and dairy products (I do like a little bit of butter on my bread). I'm also perfectly happy to turn up for reproduction duties with whoever takes a fancy to me, and also to do exactly as I'm told most of the time, designing nice new houses etc.

I do have a sense of deja vu about it. It does seem to sound a lot like the life I used to lead, or maybe fancied leading, before I got old in fact! Don't most of the guys in Aus do that yet?

Lovely essay Margriet, highly original, well argued and nicely written.

I won't twist your arm to read mine this year (though points gratefully received!) unless you now something about 'quantum mechanics' It does make sense of the current nonsense, but the trouble is you probably have to understand the nonsense first to see it's classical solution. Actually it's also a bit of a romance... but prap's you shouldn't bother!

Best wishes for staying away from the bottom anyway. Keep it up, you're improving all the time.

Peter

Margriet O'Regan

Thank you, Peter, for your kind remarks !!!

Right off the bat, though, yes, population is almost if not quite entirely the number one problem we face (other than men controlling everything). Your comments seemed to suggest that you thought that I said 're-centralising' women would jump our numbers UP! I meant to make it quite clear that our numbers would plummet with women in control of their lives especisally including their reproductive enterprise. The "opimum" number of children is not the same as having "lots" of them. Our closest cousins bear young only every 5 or 6 years.

Do you remember "God" telling Abraham (one of the original (& worst) patriarchs) that his seed/children would number as the sands of the sea. Well one way or another it's come true - but look where it's got us !!!!

I'll have a peep at your essay as I also love physics.

Cheers - Margiet

Michael muteru

margriet

I think you got your message through,though leaning too much on one side.I argue that without the presence of man the woman is useless,so too is man useless without woman,for woman gives forth and nourishes homo sapiens sapiens children,Both man and Woman are essentially needed for procreation and sustenance and mutual trust must exist between the two for survival in hostile environment and prosperity.Life began in Africa,the place of woman in our societies was of value.Its that mutual respect and love in these families that h.sapiens survived to give forth all what we call humanity.I have described abit of that in my essay LIVING IN THE SHADOWS OF THE SUN: REALITIES, PERILS ESCAPADES MAN, PLANET AND KARDASHEV SCALE.MAKING THE GREAT TRANSITION by Michael muteru weblink http://fqxi.org/community/forum/topic/2101.Kinsdly take your precious time to rate/review it.Thanks all the best

Gyenge Valeria

Dear Margriet!

I read your essay with deep appreciation of your knowledge and enthusiasm about female supportive social arrangement on Earth. It is undoubtedly true there is a male dominance present, and there are yet social structures where the women are even yet in subordinate state very for reproduction, caring for children and keeping housework only.

However, I do not think, only to adopt a fruitarian diet, and a back to living in maternal/avuncular clans will be enough restoring Planet Earth back to its former state.

I think, we need carefully discern the male and female as gender types, and male and female as energetic attributes. Living species and also inorganic parts of the nature have male and female characteristics energetically, and some species have male and female sexual types. The word 'reproduction' too, as a noun has at least 3 several of meanings. ( 1. (biology) the process of generating offspring, 2. Recall that is hypothesized to work by storing the original stimulus input and reproducing it during recall 3. Copy that is not the original; something that has been copied).

I think also, the 'evolutionary biology' is not restricted only for mentioning the process of generating offspring. That may be extended studying all aspects of molecular and non molecular evolution.

The information as you mentioned on my essay page is not restricted too being bits, bytes, qubits etc., I agree. The information may be any sort of abstraction about living and non living kind. Our thoughts convey and arrange informations . So we would say we all are composed of our thoughts about our reality living as both material and non-material. (The latter means: Information - data or ideas or observations - that can be used or reworked into a finished form)

We are destined to understand we all are several kind of parts of the original nature which is not created and unconditionally balanced by both male and female energies and also species having gender. Neither of male or female are important. At best we need arrange our thoughts and acts being lived in a balanced welfare.

Sincerely,

Valeria

Gyenge Valeria

Dear Margriet!

Let me correct a sentence written above in my comment. I wrote it ambiguously.

"...Neither male or female in any meaning are more important. The importance is balance!"

Sincerely,

Valeria

Margriet O'Regan

Hello Gyenge from Margriet Anne O'Regan ~ (Oops - this is meant to be a reply to Gyenge)

Thank you for your kind remarks on my essay !

Here I quote from you : "I think also, the 'evolutionary biology' is not restricted only for mentioning the process of generating offspring. That may be extended studying all aspects of molecular and non molecular evolution."

I agree with you wholeheartedly. In fact I'd like to correspond further with you on these topics if you would agree. You can email me at margrietanne@hotmail.com.

As 'information science' is also one of my most favourite areas of research I submitted an essay ("INFORMATION AT LAST!")in the FQXi essay competition last year 2013 ('It From Bit or Bit from It').

It would be a great honour if you would read that essay too & comment on it.

Love & happiness to all,

Margriet Anne O'Regan

Denis Frith

Margriet

I expect that many women will be involved in the ELAM movement in order to provide a balanced viewpoint. The objective of the movement is to provide sound advice and promote sound measures to guide humanity's steering of the future operation of the systems of civilization. The movement will need a variety of views, with those of women being necessary.

Denis

Gbenga Ogungbuyi

Dear Mrs Margriet,

I am delighted to see an active woman at your age in this competition. It's appreciated! But unfortunately I can see that you do not respond to the previous comments posted by members of the forum. Your good essay could have been more warm by your response to these great comments.

Regards

Gbenga

Janko Kokosar

Dear Mrs Margriet O'Regan

You gave an interesting presentation of one form of social relations. I think, that one culture in China is the most evident. Is this Mosuo? We can ask ourselves, what is the most typical reason that such community survived. Maybe they had not needed so much security as other communities on the world. What do you think?

You gave an example of impact of women on ecology. But, if women would really be so enthusiastic about ecology, we would today have electrical cars in majority. Namely, men buy cars also as a status symbol, or a symbol of a social position. They use them as boasting in the presence of women. If the women would be enraptured with buyers and developers of such cars, such cars would be today in majority. Where the motivation is, the way is also paved. But, maybe you can give also this appeal to women, beside your theory. Namely, life in cities would be much more improved if the majority of cars would be electrical.

My essay

p.s. For my essay I searched data about some lake in one cave when one species of fishes lives. Their number is controlled so that they eat each other. As a biologist, do you maybe know the name of this lake, cave and fishes?

Best regards Janko Kokosar

Jonathan Dickau

Hello Margriet,

Perhaps I should begin by saying Hail the Goddess! I find myself largely in agreement with the central thesis of your essay, but with female choice being what it is today, and given what the historical record has shown, I have my doubts that a matriarchal society would stay that way for long. Part of it is that the tradition of child-bearing and child-rearing has eroded, so this important role is no longer given the emphasis it should have. A sub-theme of my essay is that nurturing the intellectual growth of our children has fallen between the cracks, which is largely due to shifting the roles of females in our society away from nurturing children. As luck would have it; I have had quite a few long discussions with women who champion the view presented in your essay, and some of my caveats about your conclusions come from insights and information provided by those women. Specifically; it appears that female choice was its own undoing, because the women in ancient times did not take responsibility for some of the institutions created in their honor - and delegated those responsibilities to men, effectively putting them in power.

Leonard Schlain's book "The Alphabet and the Goddess" details how language and writing became the exclusive province of men, in part because women did not want to be bothered with the tedium of record keeping. If we go further back; the earliest cave paintings and petroglyphs appear to be made by female hands, but this duty was later assumed by men. Likewise; in a lecture by Elspeth Odbert, she talked about the advent of money being traced to a practical problem in temples of The Goddess, where offerings of all kinds were brought by men hoping to be chosen as a consort (i.e. - looking for sex), but things got messy when one brought chickens and another brought grain (and so on) - all of which had to be assigned a relative value. So it was decided it would be simpler and less messy to issue coins in trade for goods, and if such exchanges were taken out of the temple itself. However; there were consequences to giving away the control of written language and money, that were not foreseen at the outset. In addition; warfare was also considered too messy and risky for women to be directly involved with, so the duties of war were also assigned to men. But again; this put the power of choice in the hands of males, which had traditionally been reserved for women. Men simply took responsibility for the duties ancient women assigned them, and this gave them unprecedented power.

For women to regain a place of prominence; they must start by taking responsibility for the institutions society created to serve them. Ergo; it is extreme hubris for you to assert that on the one hand women should be made the rulers of our world, and on the other hand to assert that they can abdicate involvement in things like Math and Science. Rather; it is only when women stop holding these things in disdain that are now considered male roles, that they can reclaim their former power. Frankly; I don't see this happening, unless women take a much more active role in those very activities you have said it is OK for men to specialize. I see no chance of your goals being realized unless women do come to fancy some of the technical pursuits and sciences that are male-dominated fields, like Math, Physics, and Computing.

All the Best,

Jonathan

[deleted]

Hello again Jonethan from Margriet Anne O'Regan ~

I'm very glad that my thesis had some resonance for you !

'Goddess' you say !!? He he. Although to be honest, I have long fantized about having the following message printed on my T shirt - "Place pedestal beneath & worship" !!!!!!!!

My point is that mothering is the fountainhead & source of all that is good & right & true - & that (correct) mother-love is the vehicle through which all of these blessings - indeed all of our humanity - er, except the evil parts !!!!!!! - derive. Not just all of our biological drives such as (good & correct) subsistence appropriations practices, not just (good & proper) parenting, not just (good & proper) sociality & yes, not just good & proper sex with appropriate partners, BUT also that 'mothering' down through the eons eventually enabled our sapiens mothers to 'invent' both language, science & our intellect - our ability to see into the under-the-surface heart of things.

A baby in a mother's arms is in a very real & ultimate way, 'just' another bit of 'stuff' that she has to learn how (or acquire the reflexes & instincts) to 'manipulate' to her (evolutionary) advantage. She not only has to acquire the ability to 'merely' physically/manually manipulate this 'thing' sitting on her lap (to both her short- & long term evolutionary advantage) but to whatever extent she can see 'below the surface' of this thing, so too can she learn (evolve the capacity) to understand this unseen realm. This is the beginning not only of the highest grade of parental care exhibited by all of the 'higher' organisms, but this 'mother-manipulation-of-the-baby-stuff-in-her-arms, is also the beginning of science, maths & undoubtedly even magic & religion (except that the latter has always operated to the evolutionary disadvantage of those that took these routes to understanding ...) It was also the beginning of all tool use & manufacture - the beginning of all technology.

Nature gave us - all higher mothers - their mirror brain cells precisely as part of their ability to understand - to read, interpret & understand (resonate with) - their young. Mothers have to understand the unseen needs of their young in order to provide for them....

Men did not invent tools - nor language, nor maths, nor science, nor technology. Within certain men each of these inventions were/are 'just' 'run with' a bit further down the track, & unless they get reined in by women's nurturing skills, - our (initially) superior ability to see into the depths of things - will only help accelerate our now near certain doom.

Throughout the natural world the differences between the sexes is often as is the distinction between night & day - & that metaphore could be pushed even further thereby inspiring the observation that this difference is often like that between pure good & pure evil.

Consider the life of an alpha male lion. He first gains access to a pride only by violently ousting the current 'lords', that is by either killing or mortally maiming them. Next he mercilessly kills all of the very youngest cubs, & then next drives out all of the young growing males - otherwise the lionesses (precious) sons. And if this wasn't bad enough he or at least they (there are usually one or two of the alpha's brothers associated with him) - spend their remaining (short) tenure with the pride lying around waiting for the lionesses to make all the kills. Well almost all. Males will join in to help down the very largest game, such as buffalo. But for the most part waiting for the females to make all kills & then rush in & threaten the lunch-providers with mortal injury if they don't hang back & wait until they have had their fill, which sometimes bloats their bellies so much they can hardly walk.

I must catalogue the kind & extent of atrocities male animals practice towards the females of their species throughout the natural world. They are legion & they are all also exhibited by our own males towards women.

'Protection racketeering' is among the most eggregious & is precisely the modus operandi of male lions as already outlined above. Not a few biologists have pointed out that once esconced within a pride, the alphas then 'PROTECT' THE PRIDE NOT FROM EXTRA-SPECIFIC PREDATORS BUT FROM OTHER MALE LIONS - & so in this 'protective' role protect their own issue from other infanticidal male take overs ............ AS I said this is protection racketeering of the highest order. First inflict mortal injury to some members of the group, & then demand that they pay you - provide all your food - to hang around & protect the group from an identical infanticidal take-over.

Nature is verily indeed red in tooth & claw - which is why being a fully evolved, perfectly adapted life form (that organism which exists - indeed thrives - without causing any waste, loss or damage to anything or anyone) is such an exulted plane of being. Nature documentaries do a far too good a job of portraying all of the between-species agony, gore & death going on out there, but almost none as to the heinous predations occurring within species including that between the sexes - aka the (very literal) battle of the sexes - which particular class of atrocities (praying mantises & black widow spiders aside) are almost always perpetrated by males towards females .... And their young....

OK - sermon not quite over yet. What males do to becomne males is take something that 'life' (in the persons of nature's mothers), has already invented (as above) & then males take it to some kind of excessive extreme all by way of either courting the opposite sex &/or coercing them into compliance with sexual union. Or by 'merely' fighting/competing amongst themselves male-on-male for top spot. The 'spot' where they will attract the most female attention.

Take the peacocks tail. All birds, all peahens have tails. Male peacocks 'merely' evolved the capacity to turn their tails into the incredibily marvellous courtship accoutrements that they are. The human male's measurably greater intelligence in some areas are in te final analysis 'just' peacocks tails - accountrments meant to seduce & entice women ...

Our ancestral mothers indubitably invented (evolved the capacity) to use tools eons before men began to excel in it - only to have this particular boon turn back on them when males started holding knives to our throats & guns to our heads in order to force copulations on us. And force us into marriage. And murder any 'illegitimate' children. Have just heard about the 800 baby skeletons in some Irish home for unwed mothers ................

Our ancestral mothers invented spoken language by first doing so with their babies. Most if not quite all animal mothers talk to their young - if you haven't heard a mother cat purring to her babes & them grunting back, puppies whimpering as they rout for a teat - or a mother hen clucking to her chicks & them chirping back, then you haven't a clue as to the beginnings of vocal communication. Not only did we as a species run with this particular language boon all the way to the computerized world we live in today, but it's just one of the many existential tools men 'ran with' just a little further than was survivally necessary, but principally by way of aquiring yet one more arrow in their 'courtship' quiver.

Being a bit of a polymath myself, I have greatly enjoyed following physics, chemisty, maths & technology right throughout my life & I still have to agree whole heartedly with John Nash in his Nobel acceptance speech which if you don't already know it by heart, I could do no better than highly recommend you not only look it up but see the whole movie 'A Beautiful Mind" starring Russel Crowe !!!!

Love & happiness, peace & joy to you, Jonethan, being a male of any species is a very hard row to hoe & you men have unquestionably the hardest one of all !!!

Margriet Anne O'Regan

PS An only slightly deeper understanding of our world makes it very clear that men are not responsible for being what you are - whether good or bad !!!!

If you are really interested in this 'excuse' for all of mens' - males right throughout the biosphere - masculine behaviour, please feel free to email me at margrietanne@hotmail.com & I'll show you how the universe let's you guys entirely off the hook !!!!!!!

M.A.O.

Peter Jackson

Margriet,

Thanks for you post on mine. To save a search I responded as follows;

"I promise you QM isn't my 'favourite topic' by a long way! History has proved conclusively that despite our common view it's the advancement of understanding of physical nature that has always dictated and directed our development. Our psyche has rather followed behind, confounded by what it all means!

I argue and demonstrate the power of advancement of THINKING methodology. Stop using brains as repositories, use them to find and challenge old assumptions and 'analyse' better. Our brains have the capacity, as Judy says; we just need to teach them how and practice it.

That's what my essays's really about, making a real tangible LEAP in the right direction, realistically possible immediately! What other essay does so?! I'm a little sad I've failed to get that across (to so many the way my scores keep building but slipping back down). But of course we all THINK that we think outside all the boxes so ignore the greater possibilities. Energy without fossil fuels then slips back to the future a little more!

Thanks kindly for reading it anyway. I hope you may at least have seen how the nonsense of QM CAN be understood classically, unifying understanding (I hope you saw the end note experiment you can do at home)."

I hope you may now better see it's relevance and value. I do action not just semantics. I've just checked and I scored yours, raising it from the mid 3's. Well done again for your powerfully Amazonian and well argued proposition.

Best wishes

Peter

Margriet O'Regan

we are down to the last seconds - its already June 7 here in Oz - but as I've already said I'd like to correspond with you - AND I'm going to re-read your essay as I like what you say is its real message.

I wonder if you would be inspired to reread my "It From Bit or Bit from It" essay last year ??? I would value your opinion of it very highly - now that I know you are an EU-er !!!!

Cheers again,

Margriet Anne O'Regan

Vladimir Tamari

Hello Margriet

As an artist I have a great love for the female 'look' - beauty yes, but more importantly that sense of 'knowing what it is all about' that a strong "insensitive" male face blocks out. The mothering must have something to do with this close understanding of humanity's needs. So I do understand and sympathise with your main thesis, that we men have led our race to the edge of extinction and are still at it, "leading", "steering" and "guiding", and it is time to let the females take charge.

Trouble is that in their struggle for equality some women in many Western cultures have almost abandoned this essential gentle mothering side, even when they are actually mothers. At the same time effeminate men tend to be encouraged in cultures like Japan. Is all of this leading to a unisex society where men and women share - when possible - roles and duties?

I am 72, so the working out of these ideas and trends will become clearer after our time! And I am so happy to see the affection my daughter lavishes on her two-year old boy even as she has a successful career in a profession traditionally manned by men (pun intended). The protagonists in my essay-scenario are all men, but now you made me realise that I should have included women!

Best wishes

Vladimir

[deleted]

Vladimer ~ I am so glad you took the time to let me know your sentiments on 'mothering'. As I say in my essay even if we do recentralise women, we - us women - will have to relearn mothering all over again. Which is fortunately happening for some mothers.

One of the many worst features of the direction we are in now is that it has taken us further & further away from nature. Apart from men's alienation from the whole natural/feminine/nurturing/mothering aspect of women (which most feminists ape in their attempt to ingratiate themselves with the establishment) so very, very few of us know ANYTHING about nature at all any more.

'Nature Documentaries'. When they are not showing carnivores killing & eating doe-eyed prey with the cameras 'lovingingly' focused on the light fading from their agonised eyes as their killers crunch through their jugulars - or the blood just drains out of their abdomens as their killers wrip open holes in their underbellies as they are eaten alive .... when nature documentaries are not focused on this hideous carnage (in which carnage the endpoint selected life form will not engage), when these same nature documentary cameras present 'mothering', 99% of the time they focus ('lovingly') on the apparent agonies of the actual birthing process & the inordinate difficulty the new borns have finding their mothers teats. Etc. Rarely on the gentle beauty of mothering.

What is missing is the inordinate amount of not just nurturing but the fact that all higher vertebrate mothers TEACH their young most if not quite all of what the new generation will need to know about everything - subsistence, sociality, mothering/parenting & yes even sex. Young which do not imprint on a fully loving & competent mother will grow up with a disoriented 'mating compass', one that steers them towards a mate who has all of the core disfunctionalies their mother (tragically) exhibited. Only good & correct mothering can 'set' each new generations 'compasses' on the right course'.

I grew up on a little hobby farm & remember spending hours & hours watching our animal mothers 'do their thing' - including recognising when things went wrong.

Among these extremely pleasurable hours of observation - not to omit the seminal instructiveness of these times - were the hours 'just' watching a mother hen take care of her brood. First, noticing where she built her nest lining it with down - which rooster she chose with whom to mate - then her laying her eggs one by one (she has to mate anew for each egg), sitting on them for several weeks & then, oh joy, the darling little chicks hatching out !!! After which followed many more weeks of watching her care for & instructing them. We didn't need televion in those days - indeed, they weren't even invented then (I'm 70).

It has now been discovered that the domestic fowl has a very large repertoire of 'words' - vocalisations that have very specific meanings - including the alerts to the presence of specific predators. And a mother hen's chicks also talk back to her in baby talk !!! although they don't use most of their mother's words until they themselves are adults & in the same context. Of course, mum teaches this chicken language to her young.

So even though it's not raw nature, growing up on a little farm where the animals were loved - oh by the way we were vegetarians so we didn't kill & eat any of them - even if we 'stole' their eggs & milk !! - provided me with a window on nature which our increasingly urbanised humans will never know ....

Thank you again Vladimir

Margriet Anne O'Regan

Peter Jackson

Margriet,

I forgot to mention, I'm not 'shocked' by the Electric Universe and Thunderbolts project as I've been very familiar with Wal Thornhill and the whole groups work for some time. Mainstream theoretical doctrine mainly hates plasma as it doesn't 'fit' old models and is still poorly understood, yet it's the essential at the heart of most other physics!

Many of the EU2014 lectures were authoritative and brilliant. I do however have to distance myself from the odd excess such as the 'Thunderbolts of the Gods' video which I think could undermine the solid credibility of the work for many. Why so many deny electricity in space, half the EM phenomena, is quite beyond me. Fundamentally the problems all stem from the prohibition of a field in the flawed original 'interpretation' of SR. The disciples grasp it like a lifeline!

Have you read my logical cosmology paper explaining the coherent role of plasmas yet? There are various preprint links around.

Best wishes

Peter

Margriet O'Regan

Super !!! I'm really chuffed to find another EU-er !!! & I agree that the mythological stuff is a real hurdle to the whole thing.

I only bothered to re-examine that approach after months & months of absorbing all the plasma & electrical science.

Valles marinaris on Mars (not to omit all of its other topographical features) has become one the most convincing bits of evidence for me that our planets were in some kind of gargantuan electrical drama not so long ago.

And as geology is also one of my most favourite interests, I also find the EU interpretation of many of our own most spectacular topographical features - including our Uluru here in Oz - overwhelmingly convincing.

Back to another seminal weakness in their "Thunderbolts of the Gods" approach. Given that the Old Testament is full of 'fire & brimstone' raining down from the heavens - not to omit the Sun standing still etc - WHY in God's name (to coin a phrase !) do they not include those stories in their lists of evidence ?? It is because they don't wish to offend any Christians in their midst - which reticence was hinted at somewhere in their exegesis. Great pity. Given that the entire West is pretty much based on the Bible.

Peter, I'm not very good at looking things up via the net yet. I'd love it if you'd email me where I can view your cosmological paper - or better yet just email it to me at margrietanne@hotmail.com ??? I'd really like that, thanks.

Cheers,

Margriet Anne O'Regan