Challenging Authority to Cultivate Wisdom
This article was originally published on the newsletter blog of the International Association of Maternal Action and Scholarship (IAMAS) in December 2025
I was deep in writing an article recently when I reached out to some friends and colleagues for feedback. This is always a meaningful and generative process for me. Having others comment on my works in progress enriches my insights, and often ignites a dynamic and satisfying conversation. For me it is an opportunity to share in a deeply thoughtful reciprocal process; a way to be witnessed in nuanced detail as I grapple with my ever-evolving worldview, and to witness the inner evolution of others when I am asked to offer feedback on their works.
That said, I sometimes feel a bit deflated by the comments I receive. I’ve toiled to find the right words to relay my message in an engaging and relatable way. And then a colleague or editor reflects back to me that my message didn’t quite “land,” or feel as compelling to the reader as it did in my imagination.
I give myself a few days to sit with the feedback and to process the feelings that arise. I often feel as if I haven’t been seen or heard, or that maybe I’m not clever enough to have a perspective worth sharing. My emotional response abates with time. As I reflect on my work, a process of refinement and creative growth ensues. Generally something better—more succinct, readable, and compelling—comes from the re-working of the piece that was catalyzed by the feedback.
Yet still, one aspect of the editorial feedback I receive continues to irritate me. A sincere reader/editor makes the comment every time.
I like to speak from my gut, and use expressions such as:
My sense is that…
I feel/felt…
It seems that…
From my perspective…
The red pen tells me:
“This language weakens your argument.”
“Say it with authority.”
“We may need a citation here.”
I usually “get it,” and make the change. However, when I reflect on the finished piece, it feels less authentic; less honest. I also feel undermined and stifled.
Here’s what troubles me. Politicians, “influencers,” and experts in myriad fields assert their ideas with righteous authority and “valid” citations. And they are often wrong. Many people are affected when someone in a position of power or influence makes a bold assertion; charisma and perceived authority often coerce less confident individuals into following along.
Coercion is a tactic of authoritarianism.
Our capacity for critical discernment—driven by a feeling, experience, or process of thoughtful consideration—is our internal defense system for avoiding the trap of falling hypnotically into step with a captivating, well-compensated, or politically motivated Pied Piper, or a manipulative social mandate.
As a girl and young woman, I hadn’t developed the courage to trust my own sensibilities; certainly not if someone in a position of authority—in a white coat, with a big title, or with a confident demeanor—challenged me.
When I became a mother, however, something shifted. My sensitivity, still-developing sensibilities, and maternal instinct became forces to reckon with.
I found myself taking my small child to the doctor and hospital for urgent visits with increasing frequency. Each encounter rendered more tests, another possible diagnosis, and more meds. I sensed something was off. My child was labeled as having “developmental delays.” He had an expanding array of troubling symptoms (tics, head-banging, meltdowns of increasing intensity, skin allergies, asthmatic attacks, pneumonia…). I asked a lot of questions.
Why is this happening?
Another inhaler?
What are the long-term side effects of the meds? Will they stunt his growth?
What about the vaccines, could he be having a reaction?
The answers given went something like this….
He’ll probably grow out of it.
He’ll need the inhalers for life.
The meds are safe...they’ll only stunt his growth a little, maybe.
We don’t know what causes this, but it’s definitely not the vaccines.
I wasn’t having it. It didn’t feel right. When I didn’t accept these answers and inquired more deeply, the responses I received became aggressive. Words and phrases with a particular character were used to reprimand and shame me.
‘Fanatical parent’
Do you trust your “Google search,” or my medical license?
(Various alternative therapies) are not FDA approved. You could hurt your child.
Other mothers who felt something was “off” found me and shared their experiences and remedies. They referred me to literature, recommended traditional methods, and introduced me to nutritional healing principles. They also referred me to practitioners who listened and inquired into the same questions I was asking; practitioners who didn’t know all the answers and didn’t speak with condescending authority. They took my questions seriously, inquiring deeply into what I was seeing, sensing, and feeling in caring for my son, and they explored various possibilities with me.
I leaned into collaboration with several caring, intelligent, and compassionate people, and most importantly with my son. He got well over time—with sensitive and responsive care that went against standard medical protocol.
My sensibilities served me well.
To be in alignment with one’s inner knowing, it’s often necessary to have the grit and resources to stand alone. This is problematic in the case of motherhood, because nurturing small and vulnerable humans requires a circle of love and support.
Women—and particularly mothers—have a nuanced way of seeing, feeling, sensing, and discerning. Our way of making sense of what we feel—what we intuit—is often judged as irrational, lacking “proof,” and without merit. Our non-conforming perspectives—and questions—that challenge the status quo make people uncomfortable. My experience suggests we are especially threatening to learned people, and people in positions of power; those whom we commonly depend on as “experts.”
Scientific, medical, and government-regulated sources have immeasurable influence in intimate matters. As adolescents, for instance, girls and boys learn about the inner workings of their bodies and sexual relations through awkward “health” lessons, the entertainment industry, and pornography (see Haidt, 2025 for a discussion on the influence of pornography on children). Pregnant women are commonly advised about their gestational progress via scientific checkpoints administered through agents of a massive medical industrial complex. And although birthing mothers are “allowed” to bring a personalized birth plan to their birthing room, monitoring of labor and delivery are matters of technological calculations and obstetric protocol that take precedence over—and interfere with—mothers’ felt experience.
Such personal milestones in traditional cultures, in contrast, are navigated within the context of enduring lineages of directly curated wisdom; through rites of passage ceremonies, by the caring hands of village midwives, and under the care of kin and male and female elders.
For modernity’s gains in technological and academic acumen, we’ve all but abandoned intuition in favor of expertise, timeless tradition in favor of science, and human compassion in favor of detached professionalism. Cultures that viewed life as a sacred and precious gift to be nurtured have crumbled under the exploitative arrogance of tech savvy and scientism.
Scientists themselves challenge the integrity of their own field, often at the cost of being censored or harshly and personally criticized by their colleagues (Brownlee and Lenzer, 2024; Rutherford, 2009; TED Staff, 2013). One Stanford scientist argues that “Simulations show that for most study designs and settings, it is more likely for a research claim to be false than true” (Ioannidis, 2005). Another scientist charges that “Unfortunately, the worldview aspect of science has come to inhibit and constrict the free inquiry which is the very lifeblood of the scientific endeavor…science is now a wholly owned subsidiary of the materialist worldview” (Sheldrake, 2013).
Common sense doesn’t fit into statistical models, and often defies what statistics “prove.” Habitual dependence on and deference to experts and authority figures robs us of precious opportunities to slog through difficult situations, a process that naturally hones our faculties of critical thinking, life skills, and confidence. It also deprives us of the social and relational security developed through meaningful experiences shared by many generations of women and men; sisters, brothers, aunties, uncles, and maternal and paternal figures.
It is surely reasonable that scientists and experts have a place in the circle of communal wisdom gathering as respected consultants, but tactics of condescension, authoritarianism, and coercion must be seen for what they are and left among the smoldering wreckage of troubled times past. Data points rendered through scientific methodology are best considered among a constellation of factors gathered through direct experience, attuned presence, and sensitive relationship; the way an observant mother feels what’s happening with her child, senses her own body, and knows in her bones—with every cell of her being—when something feels “off.”
My sense is that a very sick society—one that has little regard for life and lacks capacity for compassionate relations—props itself upon crass disregard for mothers and maternal wisdom. In the womb of a culture that views the body and the world in a mechanistic way, and reductionistic scientific method as the holy path to knowledge, women and children (and therefore all members of society) are severely diminished in our capacity to realize our full potential.
My use of feeling words to express the source of my insight in speaking and writing is not me being wishy washy. If we are to shift the tide of our current paradigm, we must make space for felt sensibility to inform us at all levels of knowledge production. We grow wise when we take direct responsibility for our personal and communal decisions. My sense is that one of the most profound stands that women can take to challenge the heavy hand of systemic authoritarianism is to nurture and encourage our daughters, mothers, sisters, and extended women’s circle to hone and express our sensibilities with confidence, conviction, and compassion.
Bibliography:
Brownlee, Shannon, and Jeanne Lenzer. “The Ioannidis Affair: A Tale of Major Scientific Overreaction.” Scientific American, February 20, 2024. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/the-ioannidis-affair-a-tale-of-major-scientific-overreaction/.
Haidt, Jonathan. The anxious generation: How the great rewiring of childhood is causing an epidemic of mental illness. Chapter 7: What is happening to boys? London: Penguin Books, 2025.
Ioannidis JP. Why most published research findings are false. PLoS Med. 2005 Aug;2(8):e124. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124. Epub 2005 Aug 30. Erratum in: PLoS Med. 2022 Aug 25;19(8):e1004085. doi: 10.1371/journal.pmed.1004085. PMID: 16060722; PMCID: PMC1182327. Accessed November 2, 2025. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC1182327/
Rutherford, Adam. “Adam Rutherford: Sheldrake Persists in His Claims, Despite Their Having Been Disproven. This Makes for Bad Science.” The Guardian, February 6, 2009. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/belief/2009/feb/05/evolution.
Sheldrake, Rupert. Rupert Sheldrake - The Science Delusion BANNED TED TALK. TedX Whitechapel, 2013. Accessed November 2, 2025. https://blog.ted.com/the-debate-about-rupert-sheldrakes-talk/
TED Staff. “Open for Discussion: Graham Hancock and Rupert Sheldrake from Tedxwhitechapel.” TED Blog, March 14, 2013. Accessed November 2, 2025. https://blog.ted.com/open-for-discussion-graham-hancock-and-rupert-sheldrake/.
About the Author: Jennifer Eva Sirel-Pillau, mother of two, is a founding member of the Council for the Revival of Matriarchal Arts (CRMA). Jennifer holds a bachelor’s degree in business administration, a master’s degree in Traditional Chinese Medicine, as well as certifications in Ayurvedic Practice and Craniosacral Therapy. Her interest turned to matriarchy when it became clear in her role as a healer that virtually all chronic illnesses—physical, emotional, spiritual, and relational—share root causes that can be traced to the degradation of our social and ecological fabric. She studied matriarchal societies and matriarchal theory at International Academy Hagia with the institute’s founder, Dr. Heide Goettner-Abendroth. Her pen name is the name of her mother’s Estonian lineage.