With women allowed in science, more and more of the self reflecting, biased, shit interpretations of men fall to pieces. History written by men is also false. We do live in an illusion as it is, but it gets worst because now we actually live in an illusion of an illusion.
My favorite interpretation which has been invalidated is who dinosaurs were. The fact that they were birds, not leasards and that they were probably not nearly as violent as depicted by men even if large and carnivorous. Yes, some violence was there as we cannot escape the necessity to kill in order to survive. Picking up flowers is an act of violence. Plants are alive. You kill them to survive. Being vegan does not exempt one from this cycle. It isn’t better either. Killing is killing. No being is better than others. However, very few animals engage in unecessary violence, humans being one of them. Men, particularly tbh. No hate, just facts.
What I want to focus on is archeology though because men have interpreted stuff for dacates with little to no bases except their desire to reinforce a system of oppression as “natural“. Their main argument to reinterpretation is there is not enough evidence to state anything, except they had stated a lot and agressively enough that it stuck with people. For instance, the idea that nomad societies were violent and stealing from… whom? We were nomads, then descovered agriculture and settled, than a shift in temperature had the northern societies turn (semi) nomad again, but they haven’t invaded the sothern ones. Quite the opposite. Also, these societies weren’t undeveloped and “savage”. Savage and batbarian are terms invented to control and justify abuse. If anything the barbarians are the ones who coined these terms.
To highlight the misogyny of archeologists, I want to turn to two wonderful sculptures from Hamangia culture, settled around the now Cernavoda, Romania, from 5000 BCE.
Of the two, the only one which is spoken of and given a name is the male figure, deemed “the thinker”, while the female form is ignored as “sitting woman”. The man is “thinking” because he has his head supported by his hands, but you don’t need to hold your head to think. Not with both of them for sure. People who hold their head with both hands like that are more likely to be daydreaming or sad, hence I’d rather call him “the melancholic man”. On the oher hand, the woman is relaxed, sited directly on the ground, in connection with her environment, she is looking up. What is most striking to me that no one talks about is the third eye depicted on her forehead. He has a closed posture, she has an open one. They do seem to depict opposites. Also, his separation for the rest is underlined by the stool he is sitting on, which I have no doubt he invented.
I am not a fan anymore of separating beings and of creating idividualistic and fundamental diferences, especially based on gender, however, I realized yesterday that one cannot succesfully embark on a spiritual journey without knowing exactlt who they are. Otherwise said, you cannot disipate your ego if you are not aware of what it is exactly. We may be one as energy source and higher consciosness, but within this illusion we are fundamentally different. We are infinate manifestations of the same energy and we should celebrate and embrace that before moving on. Ignoring this only gets us stuck and even more delusional.
The joy of creating 