Our position is one where we can review all things, consider our needs and relate uniquely with God over originally intended virtue, understandings and compromises. To say that God is Subjective and Male and to say no more is to compromise. To refuse to look at God Subjectivity in the Female is to compromise the original ideal of God. A bit of patience and women and God will re-write history. Arguably, history has been written for timelines, repetitions and the like, allowing for a central person to re-try what had not previously been successful. However, this view of history is also a compromise, because it does not recognize where God, in the Feminine, was in all this. When we draw a line in the sand as to how much we will and will not do, it has to be a line drawn by women and men and it has to be based on God consulted in the Feminine and in the Masculine. Sadly, I have rarely been consulted in the Feminine.
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.
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.