Tunia: Pleiadian Gender Dynamics
Posted on by EraOfLight — 8 Comments ↓
My dearest brothers and sisters,
This is Tunia speaking. I love you so very much.
Today I would like to share how the gender dynamics work in the group of Pleiadians that I’m a part of. There are some cultural differences between different groups of Pleiadians, just as there are different cultures on Earth, and so I am only describing one set of Pleiadian genders dynamics.
I am not saying that this is how Earth humans must also behave. I am just sharing how things work where I’m from. I’ll also only be describing the most common gender dynamic that we have here. No one is forced into this specific dynamic, and some people choose to have a different dynamic than what I’ll be describing and that is completely fine.
I’ll be talking about masculine people, who are people who have more masculine than feminine energy. Most often these are men, but not always. Similarly, I will be talking about feminine people, who are people who have more feminine than masculine energy. Most often these are women, but not always.
Women certainly can spend some time doing mostly masculine-energy tasks and being in masculine energy. However, doing so doesn’t make the average woman happy.
I’ll be talking about feminine people, who are people who have more feminine than masculine energy. Most often these are women, but not always. Similarly, I will be talking about masculine people, who are people who have more masculine than feminine energy. Most often these are men, but not always.
First of all, the highest priority in Pleiadian society is that all barriers are removed that could hinder feminine people from loving unconditionally and endlessly. If we don’t have feminine people loving unconditionally, then we have nothing. In our view, science and technology and spirituality and material comfort et cetera ultimately don’t matter if we don’t have love. Furthermore, this unconditional love is what is needed to raise a healthy next generation of people.
Masculine people are not forced, but usually take on the responsibility of making sure that feminine people indeed can love freely and unconditionally. So masculine people are doing a lot of the practical work, as well as everything that’s needed to keep the feminine people safe. Of course feminine people can do practical tasks too, but the majority of that is done by masculine people. So you could think of masculine people as creating the conditions in which the feminine can blossom. And of course masculine people can be loving too, but being unconditionally loving towards everyone is usually not the primary focus of masculine people, as it is with feminine people.
Note that this is a very useful division of responsibility. Feminine people love unconditionally, which is great, but it also means that we (I’m feminine too) are absolutely terrible at identifying who may be dangerous and dealing with them in a good way. Because after all, we love everyone! Including destructive beings. We just want to give them a hug and we’re way too quick to think that if we’re kind to them, surely they’ll turn to the light. We’re also way too inclined to believe them if they lie to us. So how do we feminine people decide who we should and shouldn’t trust on a societal level? Well, we choose not to decide that. We choose to leave that to the masculine people.
Masculine people aren’t so blinded by their unconditional love, and hence they’re the people who protect feminine people. Masculine people are the soldiers, the commanders, the cops to the extent that cops are needed, those judges who deal with beings who are malevolent, and the people who make decisions about what you would think of as immigration. There are no laws banning feminine people from being a soldier et cetera, but this is how people generally organize themselves.
Most feminine people understand that the masculine people are much better at keeping everyone safe than they are. And so most feminine people simply allow the masculine people to make all the military and police and safety-related decisions, without trying to change or give input about military and police and safety-related decisions.
I think that’s a great division of responsibility. This way I’m just able to be a big fluffy bundle of love, and I’m being kept safe. And people like Hakann are able to conduct military operations as they feel the need to, and I’m not annoying him with unhelpful suggestions such as: “but have you considered giving those destructive beings a hug yet?”
I’m sort of making a joke here. Yes love is important, but well, Hakann and the other masculine people understand that too. It’s not that they’re heartless. We Pleiadians are absolutely making plenty of proposals to potentially-destructive beings for peaceful co-existence.
This setup allows the feminine people to be fully loving, and that allows the masculine people to be fully effective at keeping us safe.
Some of you may be wondering: “but if feminine people don’t check the military decisions of masculine people, then won’t masculine people become corrupt and, I dunno, start needless wars of aggression?” And the answer is that masculine people don’t start wars of aggression so long as they grow up in a society where feminine people love everyone unconditionally. Hence my earlier statement that the most important thing in society is feminine people loving unconditionally. That’s what stops everything from becoming corrupt.
Or to put it another way: why would our masculine people want to go to war, if they live in a post-scarcity society with feminine people who already love them unconditionally?
Similarly, if we had police and if there was discussion about potential police corruption or police violence or police prejudice, then most feminine people would leave that up to the masculine people to sort out. To be clear, feminine people would be allowed to give input and they’d be listened to, it’s just that most feminine people would choose not to give input.
Also, if the question came up: “should we allow these potentially-dangerous people to enter and move about freely in our society” then I also wouldn’t give input, because I don’t think I’d be a good judge on that topic. The Earth equivalent of this is that I would let the masculine people determine immigration policy. (Our masculine people are happy to let in beings of all races, so long as they’re not destructive or dangerous) I’ll happily leave that decision to the masculine people, because I think they can make a better choice than I can, and also because then I can just focus on loving everyone and spending time with my family and having fun. I don’t really want to harden up and weigh a painful dilemma about letting potentially-dangerous people in because they would benefit from being here, versus not letting them in to make sure we’re safe. I’m happy that the masculine people deal with that, so that I can remain in my big fluffy loving-everyone mode.
That’s basically my life: loving everyone, loving my gal pals in the other sense of the word, having fun in whatever way I feel like, spending quality time with my family and friends and animal companions, going on holidays with my family to beautiful worlds, regularly having massages, moving my body, being artistic, keeping up my spiritual practice, and doing some volunteer work whenever I feel like it. Okay, and I also do these channelings, but I love doing that. This isn’t work for me.
Of course some other feminine people do choose to spend a lot of time on work or research or study or self-development or whatever else they choose, and that’s fine. These fields are completely open to everyone.
Admittedly, if I ever came across a masculine person who was unhappy or who was having a tough time, and if I noticed I could help him in any way or even just listen to him, I would drop whatever I was doing and I would go and help this masculine person. Even if I didn’t know him. That’s also a part of us loving everyone unconditionally — actually sitting down and struggling people and seeing if we can help, including if it’s an unknown man who is struggling. Our feminine people aren’t treating our masculine people as disposable, or as worthless until they prove themselves useful. We have an “emotional safety net” for everyone, including struggling men
It may sound like the masculine people are getting a bad deal here because they’re doing the lion’s share of conventional work. However most masculine people are actually very happy with this arrangement. They’re usually men who are in a committed relationship with a woman who loves them and their children unconditionally. Those women genuinely look up to their husband, because he is the one who is providing all the practical and safety-related conditions that enable her and her family to thrive. Usually he is the one with say the engineering or the military expertise, which she doesn’t have. And so she looks up to him and is grateful to him for facilitating her happy life, and for facilitating the success of her society on a broader level. And because she looks up to this man, she is probably attracted to him and wants to have a lot of sex with him. Also, if he ever struggles in any way, she drops whatever she’s doing and goes to support him.
I’m perfectly well aware that if all masculine people were to go on strike, our society would screech to a halt immediately. I have no idea how to keep a space craft running, and neither do most feminine people. So, yeah. Thanks, masculine people. Thanks, men.
We feminine people accept masculine people’s authority in certain domains. If we had young children and my husband were to say “for our family’s safety, we should move to this other place” or “somehow our society is no longer post-scarcity, we need to do this and this to make sure that our family has the physical objects and food it needs” then I’d ask some questions. But ultimately I’d trust his judgement and I’d go along with his plan, even if I personally would do something else, because I know that I married a good man. And I trust him. And I know he’s better at making decisions about practical and safety-related topics than I am.
So: I get to have the luxury that basically everything is taken care of, and almost the only thing I need to do is love and enjoy myself and raise my children. Meanwhile my husband has a wife who loves and supports him, who raises his children well and lovingly, who is attracted to him, who wants to have a lot of sex with him and who gives him the authority he needs to make sure his family thrives. And so the man is probably happy to work for his family, because he’s getting a sweet deal too. Everyone is happy. Masculine and feminine people are supporting each other, and hence our society thrives.
Of course, my husband doesn’t have authority in every domain — just in the practical and keeping-everyone-safe domains. For example, we’ve decided together how we should decorate our living space, with both of us having an equal say there. Although I have the better taste. Obviously.
And of course, I only accept his authority in certain domains so long as I trust him and think he’s a good man. There’s no law or police that forces me to stay with him, or that forces me to keep giving him authority. If he made a safety-related decision but I didn’t trust my husband any longer, then no one is forcing me to obey him. It’s just that I choose to give him authority in certain domains, because that makes both of our lives better.
Because after all, it wouldn’t be fair of me to expect him to keep me safe, but then not listen to him if he were to say “we need to do this in order to stay safe.” If he has responsibility, he also needs to have the corresponding authority to make sure that he can fulfill his responsibility. And he has this authority both on the level of our individual family (if he says it’s not safe to go on holidays to a certain place, then we don’t go there) and on the level of determining societal policy (for example, masculine people determine immigration policy).
One way of looking at our society is that we let feminine people be feminine, and don’t force them to engage in masculine tasks (although they’re welcome to choose to engage in those). And we let masculine people be masculine, and we give them everything and all the support they need to excel in those fields. Our feminine people don’t try to out-masculinize our masculine people, and our masculine people honor and respect our feminine people and work to make sure that they’re safe and taken care of in all ways. That way, the masculine supports and protects the feminine, and creates conditions where she can blossom. And the feminine nourishes and motivates the masculine. If we feminine people stopped loving unconditionally, then eventually our masculine people wouldn’t be motivated to work hard and take care of people anymore, and our society would decline.
Our women also aren’t hostile towards the preferences of men. For example, we know that all else being equal, most men prefer a partner with medium-sized or large breasts over a partner with small breasts. We also know that if we’re a single mother, then we are less attractive to other men, which means that some dating and some relationship options close up to us. We know that if we have a lot of casual sex with a huge amount of different men, then that puts some men off. We’re still free to make our choices as we wish of course, but we do so while knowing the dating preferences of men. And we aren’t offended by male preferences, and we are honest towards men. After all, us women have dating preferences too, and those are sometimes illogical too if you want to look at it that way. For example, we prefer confident men and men who are taller than us, although these are not the most important things and are not must-haves. Of course, men can’t control how tall they are, and men don’t have a confidence switch they can just flick. Also some incompetent amoral psychopaths are very self-confident, while some kind and competent people are insecure, which makes confidence a poor measure of a man’s quality. And yet, us women prefer confident men who are taller than us. And so we’re not offended by theoretically-illogical male dating preferences either.
So, this is how we do things. It works great for us. Frankly, I feel like us feminine people are almost cheating, with us going on spa days to recover from our holidays, and us going on holidays to recover from our spa days. But our masculine people are genuinely thriving in this configuration as well. Lots of masculine people are perfectly happy to work hard, so long as they’re supported and appreciated and looked up to and not treated as disposable and the home front is taken care of and they have the authority to make sure that they can fulfil their responsibilities.
Conversely, a lot of masculine people on Earth don’t have those things and aren’t around unconditionally loving feminine people. And Earth society doesn’t always reward masculine people for working hard, for example if they’re in a non-prestigious or non-well-paying field. Burger flippers who work really hard aren’t really rewarded in a way that feels fair to them.
If feminine people want the benefit of living in a society where masculine people are freely choosing to work hard to make sure that everything practical and safety-related is taken care of… then from my perspective, the feminine people should also meet the needs of the masculine people, and create a situation that genuinely works for average masculine people too (not just for successful masculine people). If our feminine people implemented a system where in case of a divorce, the feminine people get the kids and the masculine people have to keep giving her resources, even if she initiated the divorce and even if there wasn’t abuse or cheating or something like that going on… then some of our masculine people would start checking out of the system, and our society would decline, and people on average would be more unhappy. No one wins when feminine people play zero-sum games against masculine people — not even feminine people win. If feminine people want a post-scarcity, “everyone is taken care of” society, then it would really help if a system was created that also allows average masculine people to genuinely thrive.
And yes, I agree that feminine people on Earth are treated poorly too. That’s true. But while true, everyone already agrees that for example men should commit less rapes. Conversely, a lot of people don’t even agree that for example divorce court should stop being biased against men, or that schools should stop emasculating boys, or that we shouldn’t have more women-only scholarships than man-only scholarships during a time when already more women attend university. It’s to the point on Earth where even the idea of asking an average guy what he wants and what he thinks should change in society, is considered vaguely disgusting or anger-inducing by many. And whenever someone actually wants to call attention to male suffering, they have to mention that women are affected too, because otherwise no one cares about the suffering of average men.
Clear male victims, such as male rape victims, receive little tangible help and have few places they can go to.
Therefore, “treat men better” is a theme that’s repeated throughout these messages. Because it’s important. Plus it’s socially acceptable for women to ask for societal change to benefit women, but it’s not socially acceptable for men to ask for societal change that benefits men. Hence your friendly Pleiadian gal pal will have to speak out for men.
I genuinely think that treating men better is a critically important step towards building a better society for everyone. I know that people want this post-scarcity society where everyone is safe and taken care of. Well, if you want to create that, you’re going to need motivated and engaged men, who feel that the current system also genuinely works for them and is fair towards them. Checked-out men aren’t going to build that post-scarcity society, and women aren’t going to be able to build that society without men. No matter how successful or how empowered women are, you aren’t reaching a post-scarcity society with checked-out men. And you can’t re-engage those men without asking them what they want and what they think should change in society, and then actually taking those things seriously and implementing some reforms that men want. Even if those reforms take away female privilege, such as the female privilege of benefitting from positive discrimination during certain hiring processes such as those with female quotas. Or the female privilege of divorce courts and criminal courts that are effectively biased in women’s favor.
As a general overview: Western society on Earth is moving in the direction of trying to push feminine people to beat masculine people at masculine pursuits. For example, you see this with women-only quotas for high-paying and prestigious positions. Being a CEO requires having a life that primarily focuses on work, and hence it’s part of masculine energy (recall that a few, but only a few, women have more masculine than feminine energy). However, one problem with this is that masculine people are generally better than feminine people at masculine pursuits, and hence pushing feminine people into masculine positions with for example female CEO quotas means that you get on average a lower quality of work, than if you just hired the best candidate regardless of gender.
Second, feminine people often aren’t happy long-term when they’re in masculine positions. Many female CEOs aren’t actually very happy. Third, billions of men start viewing the entire system as illegitimate, and thus start checking out, if men understand that they’re being discriminated against through women quotas or general pro-female bias during hiring processes. Fourth, if you want feminine people to take on masculine tasks, what do you expect masculine people to do? They can’t give birth and most women aren’t attracted to mostly-feminine men. Certainly most women aren’t looking to earn a salary while her partner is a stay-at-home parent. So in practice pushing feminine people into masculine positions means pushing masculine people to embrace video games and porn.
And everyone suffers.
Instead of trying to get feminine people to beat masculine people at masculine pursuits, I think it’s much better to set up a system where feminine people can be feminine without being socially shamed for that, and without worrying that her family can’t afford rent if she isn’t working full-time. And have the system be such that average masculine people aren’t discriminated against or continually mocked on tv and in movies. Have the system be fair to masculine men, and don’t measure fairness exclusively by which gender has more CEOs. If masculine and feminine people work together as opposed to working against each other, then everyone wins; whereas if feminine people try to out-masculinize masculine people, then everyone loses. Of course, I’m not advocating that anyone is forced into these particular gender dynamics. I’m also not saying that women shouldn’t be hired as CEOs, I’m just saying that the best person for the job should be hired, and if that means hiring yet another man then so be it. If that means hiring a woman, sure, hire the woman.
Another example of society trying to get feminine people to beat masculine people at masculine pursuits, is that in movies tiny women regularly out-fight big, strong, trained men in hand-to-hand combat. This illustrates the inefficiency of trying to push feminine people to do masculine tasks, because in the real world she’d have no chance. I do get that this is sort of wish fulfilment for some women, to see a woman beating up men. But wouldn’t you rather see a movie that depicts an honorable, trustworthy man taking care of his wife and being good to her? Instead of seeing a woman take revenge on men, wouldn’t you rather see depictions of kindness by men? Instead of the feminine trying to out-masculinize the masculine, wouldn’t you rather have the masculine support the feminine? The masculine is very happy to do so — but the masculine can’t if the feminine is hostile to it.
Finally, let’s return to space and make some disclaimers about Pleiadian gender dynamics to avoid possible misunderstanding. Yes, not everyone will fit into this kind of Pleiadian gender dynamic structure, with feminine people loving unconditionally and masculine people supporting and protecting them and taking care of practical matters. No one is forced into any kind of relationship structure or gender dynamic they don’t want to be in. In fact, no one is forced to do anything. There are Pleiadians who do things differently than this and who have different dynamics, and that’s completely fine. I’m just sharing the most common behavior and relationship pattern that a lot of my people choose to engage in.
And yes, Earth people don’t yet live in a post-scarcity society and so they may not be able to afford rent and food if only the man works. I get that. Still, Earth’s post-scarcity age is hopefully not too far off. Although it depends on the choices of Earth humans.
I hope this was interesting. I’m curious, what do you think about these gender dynamics, where women love unconditionally and men make sure all the practical and safety needs of everyone are taken care of? Would you personally be happy to live with such a societal setup? Please feel free to share your thoughts in the comments, I’d love to read them.
I’m feeling the urge to go spend time with my family, because my husband and children are amazing, and I love them so very much and I feel very grateful for having such a wonderful family. So I’m ending the message here. I hope you have an amazing week.
Your star sister,
For Era of Light
**These channelings are exclusively submitted to Eraoflight.com by the channeler. If you wish to share them elsewhere, please include a link back to the original post.