Showing posts with label Tony Blair. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tony Blair. Show all posts

Remembering : All War is Child Abuse.

all war is child abuse


a poem for 1919 - 2019

"The grooming (gaslighting) of human vulnerability is one of most vile things any human being can do to another."




It is also a song.


I try to 'remember' aware that I am placed within an historical context, a point between what has happened and what will happen, in the present, the place of happening, which is here and now.

I am aware I am here because so many organisms have lived, nurtured and died.

We are all here as a result of the evolution of  living systems.
 

And in this time, Remembrance Sunday in particular, I turn towards every ancestor ever murdered in warfare, every family bombed out of their home, every child shot in the back in flight, the terror, the pain, the loss, the grief, the disgust, the shame, the guilt, the denial, the survival, the hatred and so much else that has distorted human lives down through the wounded generations across the Earths lived in spaces, everywhere, for all time, the remembered and the forgotten.

All of that vast lived experience of terror, pain, shock, disgust.

It's a lot of peoples lives totally fucked up beyond all recognition.

It's real. It is not abstract.

I allow myself to begin to imagine the terror, the feeling, the sense of going through all of that, and I am already shattered, momentarily.  This is terrifying, when I really allow it in. It is also huge - an immense sadness, grief and dismay beyond all comprehension.

I am glad that I am only imagining, that for me this is a kind of mental and emotional thought feeling experiment.

I imagine that then multiplied million upon million fold, ordinary folk caught up in the wars of the powerful, as in WWI and WWII, the wars of colonial conquest, of indigenous annihilation.

The survivors PTSD interwoven with trying to make ends meet as a  slave, an indentured worker, a beggar, a low wage worker-labourer, a shopkeeper, a cobbler, a doctor, whatever.

I think about how that trauma and poverty 'informed' or conditioned all those lives of the centuries of warfare, and in relation to my own immediate ancestors in Ireland during the 1910s, 20s, 30s, 40s, 50s

Traumatised parents doing their best, yet passing on the woundedness, the loss, the behavioural dynamics on unresolved trauma.

I try to see through to the ripples of effect and affect. I try to see how all of that ripples through to today, how it afflicts the present, from 100 years ago and more, millennia of war fare.

15,000 years of Civilisation  and Warfare.

And the thing is this - go back 30,000 years or 60,000 years and we see very, very little evidence of any Monumental Institutional Culture, now evidence of any Hierarchy of Violence Culture.

Kings, Palaces, Pyramids all unknown.

We know that outside the areas of 'civilisation' the vast majority of sustained cultures were egalitarian cultures built for conflict resolution, de-escalation of aggression, carrying on trade.

We know that nomadic, migratory, pastoral, horticultural, fisher-hunter-gatherers in the large part maintained healthy attachment bonding between mother and child - social cultures where nurture is highly valued, more valued than power.

War is a culture, rather than a sequence of discrete events innate to human nature.

WWI cannot be studied within it's start and finish timelines and be understood.

It was another ripple in the culture of competing militarised industrialised states - the rights and wrongs of WWI are a gaslighting exercise. The issue is the culture of warfare as a political utility, which itself emerges from hierarchy of violence culture - God the wrathful, who loves you, The Murderous State that will punish you, the dominant all powerful parent.

Ending the warfare culture is the work of all honest, free adults.

Human Welfare is our business here, not Warfare. 

There was no sacrifice, nothing was won, the bland lies of polished brass, marching to order, wreaths and ceremony are in truth a private memorial attended by  some few loyal Survivors, co-opted by the Chiefs of Staff and their political masters for political advantage.

Let me clarify.

The people who lived through the combat and destruction have a fraternal duty and a human  need to remember, to bear witness to what happened, to grieve, to cry, to stand in stoic grace and to somehow integrate their experience, and be held, lovingly.

They also need full support to deal with their wounds, they deserve help in every possible way no questions asked. They rarely receive this because to acknowledge these wounds fully would be to expose the mythos of war as a sham.

And most of all they need the civilians to ensure that the politicians never, ever send future generations to go to war off shore.

I wear both poppies,  and none.

I cannot dismiss the survivors of warfare on any side, their wounds are real, and they are victimised by those who urge warfare, by those who glorify warfare in order to condition others to habituate to warfare.

"Peace is more than the absence of War." - Arandhuti Roy

War is only possible if a culture permits child abuse.

It requires an organisational effort to prepare children for the eventuality of  war.

Indoctrination is pretty central to the successful prosecution of warfare,and enforcement of conquest, and ought be understood as a grooming behaviour that has been institutionalised, weaponized and deployed, in effect if not always on concert.

All war is child abuse, child abuse is war.

The vast resources deflected away from nurturing happy healthy families, safe communities and thus functionally sound societies deprives every child of those societies, and is a form of indirect child abuse.

The training of youngsters to become combat troops, to become something that they can have no experience of; the deliberate, methodical organised killing of warfare, and it's disorganisation in the field.

They have to break the youngster and rebuild, re-condition and in effect brain wash that youngster as part of a group going through the same abusive training that it's their togetherness that matters, so they all push through, as a habit, as an emotional reaction.

This is typically done between age 16 and 22 whilst the frontal cortex of the brain is still developing, whilst the young persons brain is still vulnerable to adverse environmental influence.

.
"probably the most important fact about genetics and culture is the delayed maturation of the frontal cortex—the genetic programming for the young frontal cortex to be freer from genes than other brain regions, to be sculpted instead by environment, to sop up cultural norms.

To hark back to a theme from the first pages of this book, it doesn’t take a particularly fancy brain to learn how to motorically, say, throw a punch.

But it takes a fancy, environmentally malleable frontal cortex to learn culture-specific rules about when it’s okay to throw punches.”


Robert M. Sapolsky, Behave: The Biology of Humans at Our Best and Worst




Talking to children about Heaven and Hell is terrorism, if you can see it honestly, for what it is, without judgement, as a anti-biological cultural behaviour pattern.

To insert into the child's mind the existential fear of his or her own 'soul', or 'self' based on a fable through reward/sanction behaviour modification dynamics that internalise the external values into the child so that the child believes those values to be his or her own.

Terror, fear and Hope.

Look at it that way and then the behaviour can be addressed.

It's again the pattern of intruding into the child's psyche.

Colonialism.

"We do not need to shape our children, rather we need to respond to who they are."

The fear the child will not choose the Religion or System on their own is great, and is a reflection of the insecurity of all dogma, all doctrine, all religious zeal and practice.

Same thing, different appearance.

Healthy people do not go to war.

And so it goes..

The culture routinely, and understandably, ignores the meaning of the harms caused - we avoid the intensity and intimacy of each act of violence, each death moment is masked out.

They lost their lives is uttered rather than they were murdered for political power.

Yet each thing like that existed, and they continue to exist, and there is no balance, no resolution to that death. We cannot claw back the life that has been utterly destroyed.

Thus the historians and school masters utter numbers, statistics, miles gained or lost, and they  speak of generals, and heroes, and the villages in between are invisible - the deaths are less than notable.

Just numbers. Just numb.

And so the war habituated people will quote such information in repetition, having 'learned' the official narrative, euphemism to mask the immensity of individual suffering, repeated in unspeakable intensity, by the millions, re-presented as historical sentiment  via caricature that brings tears to the eyes, the emotions of national sacrifice so carefully tended.

That's a big ask to feel into that immense well of pain, grief, desperation, it's so much easier to take the heroic stance.

But we need to feel into that to really understand why in a fully embodied sense we must cease our states engaging in warfare.

Hence my latest release* - All War is Child Abuse.

*See and hear above!

My argument is simple.

The indoctrination that is central to the prosecution of War is child abuse.

Organised, Institutional invasive psychological grooming to exploit that child-adult for violent political activism - that's what soldiers are.

They are the tactical violent utility of the ruling class.

They wage war for political masters.

The waste of materials and wealth and human time, from extraction industries, to weapons makers, then the destruction wrought by warfare consumables 'market' - all of it is global child abuse.

I get that many millions of folk have lived experience of this in ways i do not, in ways I would never want to experience and that I am not 'expert' here...

I am looking at all the elements and I find nothing that exists that balances the harms experienced.

Nothing.

Nothing in war that I would 'endure' to serve Humanity. Nothing I would ask any other to bear to 'save' Humanity...

It's bullshit to claim there is glory, goodness, heroism, sacrifice in war - those are all after the fact rationalisations or pre-fight fantasies.

The exploitation of the hyper-adrenalenised traumatised wounded survivors trying to make sense of it all.

Nobody wins war.


As I understand it 'losses' in war are in fact the numbers of people murdered by a system of power, be they troop or civilian, adult or child, volunteer or conscript.

Murders, not losses.

Losses to the organising agencies, whose concern with numbers of troops is rather obvious.

To go after troops who murdered people in Iraq and to avoid going after the men who organised and funded and prosecuted an invasion and war against another state?

That is an appalling act of deliberate hypocrisy, because that failure to indict known War Criminals is part of what enables War Makers to get away with it. They never go to jail.

Colonialism and Conquest.

I find it  appalling that the majority of Europeans cannot 'see' what Colonialism really costed, and still costs,

How can they not understand that a cruel dynamic generated the wealth and status we Europeans now stand on, which we were born into,

I find it appalling that we British are not strong enough to arrest our White European Christian War Criminals.

Blair is free and that indicts the entire Western European polity, straight up.

Bush is free, and that indicts the entire Industrial World. Straight up.

I say this - We remember and we must prevent or it is just nostalgia and cover-up, which is very, very stinky evil.

Go on, then, televise and broadcast the old men of 'yesterdays wars' tearing up, the young men in fresh uniform, the disabled veterans, the bugle, the wind, the seriousness of the moment, the standing, lots of standing.

But if they go to war tomorrow, if we allow our Government to go to war, if we permit venal men and women to fund covert warfare, to supply active combatants in illegal Wars, in effect spreading violence, then it's just a load of political grooming gangsterism.

Just for the show.

It's not a good show.

Remember that as you go.

Remembrance.


Kindest regards

Corneilius

"Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe"

Thank you for reading this blog. All we need to do is be really honest, responsive to the evidence we find,and ready to reassess when new evidence emerges. The rest is easy.

Brexit 101, and an odd thing.



There's a HUGE problem here and I want to open up about it.

Grooming and Manipulation

As long as the polarised leave/remain dynamic is dominant among media and politicians, and others, and the people who are being triggered and enervated are seeking to 'win', on all sides, no one is acknowledging that they have been groomed, gaslighted and emotionally manipulated to hate the other side.

That's a serious vulnerability.

I see people on both sides dehumanising the other as a result.

It's appalling behaviour.

It is THE problem, here, not the decision itself.

We have been socially conditioned to not see manipulative bullying when it happens, and we are unable to name it, and confront it it our offices, and our civil and political lives.

So here's the way forwards...

..... taking back control 101

We the grass roots want and deserve an honesty in political, civil and economic policy design, implementation and review.

The problems are not of the EU alone.

They are of the existing hierarchicaly system of power, currently occupied by a small minority of local and global oligarchs placemen.

Putting Tony Blair and all who voted and promoted for the Invasion of Iraq on trial would be my version of #takingbackcontrol #nowthatswhaticalltakingbackcontrol

It's not on the Brexit menu,

How odd!

We the people, the grass roots taxpayers and voters and non voters all deserve honesty and transparent in political and civil administration.

That much we can all agree on.

How odd!

Kindest regards

Corneilius

"Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe"

Thank you for reading this blog. All we need to do is be really honest, responsive to the evidence we find,and ready to reassess when new evidence emerges. The rest is easy.

Brexit, Blair, Bolton and The ICC - The Healing Powers of Prosecution

Iraq is never far from my mind.





The Healing Powers of Prosecution.


Last year, in July 2017, an Iraqi citizen's attempt to bring a private prosecution against Tony Blair for War crimes was rejected, because the "High court rules that there is no crime of aggression in English law under which former PM could be charged".

"The decision blocks an attempt by a former Iraqi general, Abdulwaheed al-Rabbat, to bring a private war crimes prosecution against the former Labour leader."


John Bolton , National Security Advisor to President Trump, tipped as the next US Ambassador to the UN, has this week threatened the ICC, it's officials, funding and infrastructure with direct material reprisals if they pursue any American citizen or military personnel for War Crimes, anywhere. "The ICC is dead to us.." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JZkXVqHMzV4 And here, an history of John Boltons criticisms of the ICC. John is a nice man, but tough, he'd have us all believe. He is, of course, a Patriot. He softly says, "The ICC is dead to us.." speaking for the US State, the way a 'compassionated' christian right winger semi-ideologue would to an errant son or daughter, who had become athiest, and was being disowned ... the drama, the guile, the guilt tripping..... all to mask a heart of stone, an intent towards evil. Nice man, nasty behaviour? Charm, and presentation skills. So what is the ICC? How does it relate to the UK, and why does no-one in the Brexit Camp speak of the ICC in the same tones as John Bolton?

The ICC is a European project, based on European Human Rights Legislation and International War Law. Surely the Brexiteers would be delighted to see that go, yet they rarely mention it. That is a bit odd. As if they did not want to talk about it. The ICC is convened and instituted under the Rome Statute of The International Criminal Court, and is the recognised International Court where War Crimes, Genocide, etc are prosecuted.
The ICC has been ratified under international treaty by 132 of 195 States. The USA is a signatory, but has not ratified the ICC.
.

The UK is a signatory and has ratified the ICC, by international treaty, and the International Criminal Court Act of 2001 did integrate the ICC and it's procedures into UK Statute Law, in the aftermath of the Pinochet debacle. Tony Blair over saw this. I bet he regrets it now.... His role in Brexit is divisive, and he is fixated on using the Remain extreme to undermine Corbyn and the democractic emergence within the Labour movement. Whilst the judgement of the High Court (see above) is technically correct, it is in fact misleading, and therefore wrong.

An ICC investigation and indictment can be initiated here in the UK. Once indicted, the defendant is trasferred to the Juridstriction of the ICC. Because there is no Statute Law to prosecute a War Crime in English or Welsh Law. Obviously. I repeat , the investigation can be initated in the UK, in England, and if it leads to an indictment, the prosecution will happen at The Hague, and thus the indicted defendants are transferred to The Hague for actual prosecution.
I think some people are very worried, very worried indeed. Who is worried, and why?
Jeremy Corbyn is among the few leading active politicians who has suggested that War Crimes investigations into Iraq are a necessity for the UK State to regain it's honour. He has some support among the populatioon for this. Indeed, the evidence we already have demands it, and nothing less.

However, we have a problem. Here it is.
1. The fact is that unless the next Goverment has the support of an active grass roots across the country and also within the Civil Service, Military, Police and Justice Systems, and the News media, this cannot succeed.

2. A leader or party cannot do this on their own. They needs us, the entire taxpaying population, not just cheering on, but materially active, ensuring that the Establishment do not derail the process - people power as a restraint on those who would wish to avoid accountability, and justice...

3. The list of people to be prosecuted is long. Think about it, all the high officials who acted, knowing that there were no weapons of mass destruction, and that the action itself was an illegal act of the War of Aggression. All the pundits, the editords, the media owners who dictated the agenda to support the war, the mercenary companies, the supply companies, the contractors of war.


4, A divided electorate, an ideologically divided population, groups who are being trolled to target each other, to hate each other, to fear each other, in our own communities, the distractions of debt, poverty, property ladders, Brexit, Control and Love Island. This is the situation we have been quite deliberately manipulated into. That manipulation, the fact of it, is a far greater problem than the Austerity Brexit it spewed onto our communities. I digress.


5.Jeremy Corbyn is the only leading politician in the UK whom I am aware of that has said in public that he supports War Crimes investigations, indictments and what flows from the evidence trail.#


6. The entire Establishment will resist this with all their might.

7. How far do you think thay are capable of going to prevent this?

8. Are we strong enough as a population to do this?


9. Am I strong enough to do this?
10. Are you?
11. It needs to be done.



Kindest regards


Corneilius

"Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe"

Thank you for reading this blog. All we need to do is be really honest, responsive to the evidence we find,and ready to reassess when new evidence emerges. The rest is easy.

Trump, May, Climate Change and Sex.

Good questions

1. Whether warfare and violence are a necessary condition for humankind to progress - even if we don't like the idea - is the "authoritarian tendency" an evolutionary adaptation inherited from our primate ancestors?

2. Or is it a culturally defined mode of action which we can choose to reject?

3. What evolutionary advantage can be held by societies that reject warfare if their neighbours who don't accept it wipe them out?




My answers:

1. The evidence, biological, archaeological and psychological is clear that the bulk of human existence we have lived as egalitarian societies, ranging from small bands of nomads to large concentrations in villages, towns and small 'cities', built with natural materials and no monumental structures of any kind. Our evidence is that that healthy human behaviour is pro-social, nurturant, connected, sensitive and yet robust, We also know that most behaviours are learned.

2, http://www.violence.de/prescott/letters/Social-Behavioral_Characteristics.pdf - the research by Textor and others such as Sorensen, Ward, Prescott, Murdock and Demeo and many others since then suggests that hierarchy is a cultural dynamic, rather than a biological mandate.(more on this below)

3. Evolutionary advantage - what are the assumptions behind the phrase, would such a phrase emerge from within an egalitarian mindset, or is it a projection of the hierarchical mindset? Does the culture seek advantage over the habitat or do they 'co-operate' with the habitat and all that lives in it.

We, as individual human bodies, are comprised of a myriad of organisms which we cannot see, and without which we would not survive.

If one looks at it carefully, one can see that seeking advantage (over nature and other humans) is the core dynamic of the bully, or the parasite, whereas working together (with nature and other humans) is the core dynamic of a healthy individual within a healthy group.

Evolution is driven by health rather than dysfunction.

Violent Hierarchy inhibits natural evolutionary processes.

The damage caused by Violent Hierarchies runs directly against healthy evolution, and it is not logical to describe a dysfunctional behaviour as evolutionary - evolved to be diseased - as the terms are mutually exclusive..
An article that explores this in more detail, with references.



Cultural Social Behavioural Variables.

As mentioned above,  anthropologists in the 1920s - 70s were very busy indeed : Robert Textor surveyed 400 cultures, George Murdock looked at 117 cultures , and these were then meta-analysed by Demeo in the 80s, looking at  a number of social-behavioural variables and measuring their incidence, with geographical mapping as an output, to see the world wide distribution of data.

There is another vast written record of first contact with many, many more pre-conquest cultures, contained in the accounts of Christian missionaries during the initial expansions into un-conquered lands...

Patri- and Matri-lineal Cultures.

https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Histograms-of-Regional-Behaviors-Textor-Data-400-Cultures-63-Variables_fig1_233954702

DeMeo’s work supports the assertion that there is a profound correlation between the way children are related to and the behaviour of a given society. It mirrors what is known about trauma when it afflicts entire communities, not least when his patterns of trans-generational post trauma behaviours can emerge as social behavioural characteristics...

" It is highly significant that strong positive correlations, with only a small minority of exceptions (related to confounding data codings, as mentioned above), exist between infant and childhood trauma, adolescent sex-repression, male dominance, social hierarchy, destructive aggression and warfare."
 
That said this narrative has it's critics.. 

Demeo wrote a book on this in 1998, after many decades of research...

Most seem to wilfully misinterpret what the narrative is saying, and thus their critique is not of that, but of what they think it is.. 

It did not help that his book, produced in the late 90's, had a rather incendiary title, Saharasia, the 4000bc Origins of Child Abuse, Sex-repression, Warfare, in the Deserts of the old world.

Some people have assumed that this evidence neatly explains the 'nature' of the existing North African, Arab, Persian cultures. They fail to see the tragic irony of their own Anglo-Saxon legacy with regard to egalitarian cultures world wide.. They miss the meaning, and seek to enunciate their own values.

DeMeo stated the case, clearly. 

The institutionalisation of violent hierarchies, as a social behavioural pattern, is the issue, not the 'nature' of a given 'people'.  It is learned. It started somewhere. There is nothing natural about power hierarchies, other than as un-resolved post trauma response that has environmental and experiential dynamics.

The dynamic of violent hierarchies also emerged in South America, in areas where desertification occurred, which gave rise to the Inca and Aztec Empires.. 

It also emerged in lessor forms, locally across the globe.. 

Others then attempt to debunk DeMeo, in order to maintain public order, to undermine the previous critique, which is seen as incendiary. They want to prove that the Arab, Persian, North African, peoples are just ordinary folk, like us. They are, of course.

The see no need, there is nothing but nastiness there, and I agree with them, to impugn any group or individual people with 'scientific evidence' in that fashion, and because the second set of debunkers misunderstand the misunderstanding of the previous critique, they fire ahead, that complicates matters...  they are debunking the wrong thing.

Then there's the adherents of Monotheism in all it's glory.

They hate this book. The Abrahamic Religions in particular.

Too bad.,

Climate change and Sex!

We now understand that intense climate change occurred in the Saharasian regions around 4000 bc, which co-incides with the emergence of patriarchy as a force majeur in human culture.

Where previously a lush land existed, rainfall vanished,  deserts emerged, and living conditions became very harsh. 

Traumatisingly harsh?

We see too, in the archeo-historical record, areas of desertification in South America and China correlated with aspects of emergent patriarchy. The Inca, The Aztec, etc…

However, the Australian history is different..... 

That group of humans (nearly 1 billion live lived, in total, so hardly insignificant) went through two or three massive climate changes, which involved desertification of previously lush ecosystems, and this has happened within a period of 60,000 years of continuous human culture, and we see that in this experience, somehow patri-linealism, violent hierarchies etc did not emerge.

Instead that group remained largely co-operative, egalitarian, connected to the land base, responsive to it, and developed traditions of respect for and knowledge of food resources available, providing a hugely variable diet, and it might have been that alone that allowed them to survive and indeed thrive.  

They were more at peace with each other, than at war, is I think a fair assumption. I’d call that healthy..

There were, across Australia, at least 250 language groups, with huge genetic variations across the population, when the first Europeans arrived.... and there was no war, clans had minimal hierarchy, men and women had equal standing, children were treated with utmost respect and empathy, although there was degrees of conflict and some violence, they were adept at de-escalation and their connection to the land base and food resource base was peerlesss.

This consciousness can be called pre-conquest consciousness. Before violent expansionary hierarchies emerged...

Thus the history of our species contains the resolution of the current Climate Change issue - co-operation rather than competition enables human societies to thrive in almost any circumstance.

Violent Hierarchy - the competing powers dynamic of the dominant industrial system undermines that ability, and the issue is less a matter of evolution, or revolution - it is a matter of healing.

This is not a question of winning, rather it is a question of balance and healing, and any aspect of that dynamic - winning - will undermine the pursuit of balance and healing, which is the very definition of natural justice.

Sex-economic Theory, Trump and May

Economic power mediated through sex and gender, with men as buyers, and women as sellers.

Reich. And many others, have looked at this.g 

Fuck it, we're all looking at this every ef

The woman as property, the woman placed in a state of dependence, the religious consecration of that dynamic, the woman as breeding ground for expansion, the children as the expansion medium, the shock troops of future cultural hegemony. Children as objects..

These are all still deeply rooted in our culture, in spite of it’s self declared Christian-Secular vision of progress.

There is so much pain in sexual and gender relationships world wide..... so much harm, and that is a symptom of the dominant social power systems, as much as the wounds and flaws of individual human beings under socialised pressure. We are looking at The Vatican, Rugby, Swimming, Schooling, Care systems and seeing widespread sexual assault still being ‘managed rather than directly and robustly confronted. In the 21st Century…

Hello!?

A lot of people may well have moved on, as many claim, and good for them - however  it has not yet altered the fundamentals of the existing social behavioural dynamics of power, economic or otherwise.

Can we see the toxins in the water we are swimming in?

How to meet as true equals, albeit uniquely different, in a culture deeply and historically rooted in this dynamic, when all our social behavioural conditioning has been influenced sub-liminaly as much as consciously by growing up in that environmental experiential dynamic and we are taught to see each other as stereotypes, rather than precise individuals that we are, where value is unmeasured and the price is irrelevant, because it is freely given.

Isn’t this what Feminism, for both men and women alike?

No more bullying.

The pleasure in fully meeting life - that sense of connection is intimate, it is our sensory acuity heightens that intimacy, that sense of connection; insecurity and competitive-ness undermines that, and it is no place for the exercise of power over another.

That, for me at least, ranges from sexuality to cooking, from child care to elder care, it is an acute sensitivity, a natural sensitivity, a natural tool kit… a responsive modality of living.

Men, women and children - we are all are born into this acculturation, and yet we are not of it, and our liberation can only emerge as we decolonise our minds and our bodies, and allow our natural sensitivity towards optimal health to emerge.

Thus the positions taken on either side of the Men vs Feminist mainstream discourse (if one can call it that, it's more like a competition debate) cannot, by definition, resolve the issue. 

Obviously neither Donald Trump nor Teresa May are Feminists They are bullies.

Bullies cannot, by my definition, be Feminists.

Men and Women alike must understand what they have been born into, as observers and as participants, and be given the option to disengage, by their own choice.... to assert their own most genuine sense of self within a cooperative social dynamic.

As nature intended.

That is my expression of what true liberty means.






Kindest regards

Corneilius

"Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe"

Thank you for reading this blog. All we need to do is be really honest, responsive to the evidence we find,and ready to reassess when new evidence emerges. The rest is easy.