So, what is our position? It is a position to review, to expose the stark reality of masculine condescension, not now, (if now is a turning point), but in history, historical dialog and to favor a new and real, if not ‘more true’ understanding: of how God created; what is God’s Subjective Nature; and, why [in specifics and particulars] God wants justice for all objects. Some may say this is hopeless, but it is considerably more hopeful than not considering women at all and leaving God in perpetual disbalance for want of being able to liaise with Her/His daughters in continued patterns of true growth, happiness and relationship, not just for women but fundamentally too, for the fulfilment of love and to give joy and receive love joyfully and completely.
Today’s herstory calls for women to tell their story, as they saw it. If it is bitter, will it replenish? But if bitterness is obscure, will we remember where we have been? Balance, for those who write history, is always called for, and now it is required. How can a woman write history without passing it past a man’s eyes, and how can any self-respecting men of this age even consider going to print without consideration of the woman’s ownership of history, as a joint venture? Let us, therefore, go into our future, remembering our position, honoring God in Feminine and Masculine and portraying values that may keep to position, but fully listen to other positions. As for advocating for God, we all do, but we do wish to have advocacy for God as the Subjective Female, or Feminine, Creator, for to say I did not create in the Feminine, is not true.