|Rasa Von Werder seeks the most beautiful males in the world for promotion & paid modeling. If you look like the models featured on these pages contact her – RasaVonWerder@Yahoo.com The new website, “Embodiment of God” will preach through words & images that Creation is Sacred, & all creation is God & of God – there is no Creation that should be abused, exploited, disregarded or disrespected. The earth & sky are God, the oceans are God, animals are God & the human species is God, but they are not to exploit other Creatures. There will be an old but new version of religion, putting God back into sex, sex back into religion. In the Shakti religion men worship the female as a gateway to God, they gain Enlightenment by giving her body pleasure. There will be instructions on this, as males taught by other males are in the dark.|
NEW TEACHING I WILL LIVE OUT AS AN EXAMPLE TO MATURE WOMEN OF THE FUTURE
Harems of men for women! Women living for their own pleasure, not forever sacrificing themselves to others!
What I outline now is my future, & this future will be lived as an example to women everywhere. As I have always EMBODIED a thing which I did, that taught others by example, I will now embody a lifestyle that is considered taboo by the standards of Patriarchy. We will once again disturb the assumptions of culture & shake up a lot of people to the core.
I will live TO BE HAPPY. I mean to be happy FOR MYSELF, not constantly sacrificing, mortifying & giving away, but using my own God-given money MYSELF as a creature & a woman.
I am fairly wealthy now, & going to be wealthier, & with this money I will buy a mansion in California, & in this mansion I will continue taking pictures of beautiful males & having fun with them. That’s it in a nutshell, but there are details.
I will dress in beautiful clothes, feeling attractive & desirable & acting that way. I will do whatever it takes to present beauty in my appearance.
It looks like there will be several new sources of income for me in the future. I predict the movie of my life will finally be produced. This would center on the past, most notably, “Stripping for God.” But today I am building a website that reveals my present activities - a Reality TV show will be offered me to document this. So there are two additional sources of income, the movie & TV show. Not saying this will all happen THIS YEAR. It will be 2017-18 before all these factors gel.
Now if I were the typical woman my age, I would center around family affairs, gardening, knitting, charitable giving, all the things rich old women do. Nothing of the sort. I will break the mold & create a new identity, beyond Auntie Mame, like her but more extreme. (Not saying I will be a Scrooge, charity will not be forgotten. I might add that what I do here is not "hedonism," or "selfishness" in the NEGATIVE sense. In the positive sense, I am doing what God wants for myself & others. I have lived a long life of suffering, poverty, renunciation & giving. This is my reward. Many deserve such a reward. It is given to Great Saints to "die" once, then the Resurrection. We do not stay on the Cross forever. At some point, we reach Heaven, & this can begin on Earth. God is not a mean God, She wants us, through our trials, to eventually gain total happiness.)
As usual, women are supposed to be self-sacrificers – why are they not allowed to live, to be happy for themselves? All the relatives stand around with the needs she is supposed to supply – that’s all she’s good for – money! The assumption here is HER LIFE IS OVER, she is washed up, out to pasture, not good for anyone or anything, certainly NO MAN WANTS HER! She, most notably, is not supposed to have a SEX DRIVE. God forbid, how perverted, how sickening, a woman over sixty who wants to have sex, & sex not with Viagra propped old men, but young men who can’t keep it down! This is unheard of, this is wrong, this is an aberration, how dare woman you want this?!
But what about Hugh Hefner? Why do people smile at the idea of the rich, powerful, now old man of 85, who dates only the young? Have you seen the Playboy spreads that feature “mature” women, “WOMEN OVER 31?” And Hugh admits he has to take Viagra to “satisfy” his woman – women need no Viagra to have sex!
Let’s face it, since the onset of Patriarchy, it’s all about the women – get the women – control the women – sex the women. Without the women wealth & power, what do they mean? This is accurately explained by the renowned geneticist Dr. Bryan Sykes of Oxford University – the man who told the world that human males are going extinct.
Bryan Sykes explains how in the beginning of Patriarchy it was all about women – conquest for women – war for women. Males amassed harems of from 300 for the Pharaohs to 16,000 by the warlord Genghis Khan. (There is also a contingent that want men of course. Wherever there are homosexuals there are harems of boys, from the altar boys of the Catholic to boys choirs, to Boy Scouts, to male models, to military men – wherever there are boys, young men, they are amassed in “harems” for men who want them. These men naturally either have money or authority over the young males.)
The idea of a female having a harem is unheard of, because harems go along with wealth & power. But more than that, harems for women are denounced & forbidden by Patriarchal religion & culture. So as I said, even the women who in Patriarchy, have lots of money, this money is not spent for harems of young males!
For what I am about to do publicly, is forbidden to women. No woman (in the mainstream culture) is allowed to have multiple males. If they do they are denounced as “immoral” – while males for the most part are forgiven (the double standard of morality, & this applies not only to sex but crime—women are given far harsher punishment for a crime than are men). Of course, this concept is breaking up with the advent of Matriarchy & the descent of Patriarchy, but my activities will hurry this along.
In about 3-4 years, at my age of 72 or thereabouts, you will see my mansion in Hollywood or Beverly Hills, elevated with spectacular pools, an indoor-outdoor house great for photography. You will see me in person cavorting with the young males I meet & hire – taking images of them & having fun. I will espouse my theories on life – all this will be documented on television.
I will be in demand once again on TV talk shows & documentaries, radio, & public appearances. This present lifestyle coupled with the movie “I Strip for God” will blow the demand for me sky high. I will go on TV shows with one or more models, they will pose, I will explain the philosophy. It’s Female Empowerment once again! It’s table turning, it’s role reversal, it’s freeing up of women to have fun, to live, & to live life abundantly, to be free including the freedom for old women to have fun with multiple young men!
To reiterate: Older women will be encouraged to follow in my footsteps, they will see the idiocy that women over fifty are finished, over the hill. It’s possible that young males want us, especially if we have resources. Courage, self confidence, & seeing the truth is what happens here. Some of them will take up cameras & become photographers like me, others will pursue different venues by which they can meet young males – all for good – to gain their own happiness & influence males toward a positive culture.. As I said, I lifted weights, then other women lifted weights. The idea of fitness for women became mainstream. I preached Female Supremacy through domination, the domination theme went mainstream. I preached “Woman, Thou Art God,” now women are accepting their divinity. This is another leg on the body of Female Empowerment, I light the way, they follow.
PS I welcome a forum on this. I would especially like my confrere William Bond to comment. Friends, please share this on your timelines & allow discussions. This is the big future project that will catapult Matriarchy further up the road.
As I said, I have always embodied what I preached. I brought forth Female Body Building, Stripping for God, & Female Domination into the mainstream, I have brought out, with William Bond, the principles of Matriarchy to a world audience. Now this. Discussion will ferment the cycle of liberating minds, forming ideas & concepts.
From Guru Rasa Von Werder, 12 28 13
DO TEARS TRIGGER ERECTION?
Historically, powerful women do tend to have a strong sex drive. Before the Roman invasion of Britain the Celtic Queens who rule Britain and Ireland were famed for having sex with many men at the same time. Cleopatra was also known to have a strong sex-drive. Then we have Catherine the Great who had sex with many young men. In more modem times we have Mae West who used her fame and wealth to have a harem of young body-builders. Perhaps the reason why powerful women have a strong sex-drive is that they can have sex in the way they want it, which is satisfying to them. Which means having sex with men who do as they are told and are willing to please.
VoiceofmotherGod RasavonWerder thanks William. I knew two of Mae West's lovers in that harem - Reg Lewis, who was 19 @ the time he with with her, & Micky Hargitay, who became my lover & asked me to marry.......Reg was married when I met him, but Mickey was the greatest lover that I ever had. So maybe Mae taught him. He told me the story, it was whimsical. At first, when she got him into her room, she told him to make love to her. But he could not do it, as she looked so old. Then, he said, she started to cry. After that, he could do it. Lol. I need to learn how to cry - I can't....Maybe it triggers a hardon?
Elizabeth SPEAKS THE TRUTH!
it is a HUGE lie that women lose their sex drive as they age. during menopause, some womens' libido goes into hibernation for a little while as their hormones decrease, and they go thru a period of adjustment. i thought my sex drive was DEAD, as most times, a cup of coffee, a piece of cake and good conversation was preferable to a carnal encounter! also at that time, i wasn't interested in anyone, so actually, it worked out well! believe me, when someone came along, that switch flipped and i was raring to go!! it hadn't died at all!! so women have to STOP BELIEVING PATRIARCHAL DOCTORS, ETC...typical that they would tell us we were all dried up and sexless, therefore, allowing 'males to go after younger women.
Why We Need Female Leadership by William Bond
William Shakespeare wrote, "Be not afraid of greatness; some are born great, some achieve greatness, and others have greatness thrust upon them." The reason why greatness has to be thrust upon some people is because they fail to recognize their true worth. This is certainly the case with most women, who generally have little ambition to be leaders, thereby creating a power vacuum that is almost always filled by aggressive and competitive men.
Many people have pointed out that what we call history is often just a long list of wars and conflicts. Unfortunately, this is as true today as it ever was; there always seems to be a war in some part of the world. Another familiar theme in history is poverty and oppression. This is hardly improving today, despite our material achievements. In many parts of the world, the gap between rich and poor is growing all the time, causing social instability and violence which leads to government oppression to maintain control.
Great men have seen these problems throughout history and attempted to find solutions to them. They have invented many political systems, like monarchy, theocracy, plutocracy, fascism, communism, socialism and democracy, in an effort to create a more peaceful and fairer world. The common factor in all these systems is that to a lesser or greater degree, they have all failed. For this reason most people seem to have given up on finding any political system that might make our world a better place. But there is one that has not been tried and that is matriarchy.
When we look back into recorded history we not only find war and poverty, we also see that it has always been men who have ruled our world. According to Steven Goldberg, there is a good reason for this. In his book, "The Inevitability of Patriarchy", he makes a strong argument as to why men have always ruled the world and always will. His reasoning is to do with testosterone. This hormone makes men more aggressive and more competitive than women and it's why men will always work harder to gain wealth and power. It's true that some women can be as competitive as the average man and get to the top in many professions, but they are the exceptions that prove the rule. If we look at history and the world today we can see that Goldberg is right. The vast majority of the world's wealth and power is in the hands of men.
If we accept Goldberg's argument, it means men will always rule our world. The trouble is that if only the most forceful and belligerent people can claw their way to the top to achieve wealth and power, we will always live in a world of warfare, injustice and poverty. We may not see this as a problem of course, but if we want to live in a world of peace and stability, we have to realise it is not a good idea to have only the most aggressive people in charge. It would be better if loving and caring people did the job instead. So how do we achieve this? It can be done if people are willing to support matriarchy.
As Goldberg points out, women have less testosterone in their bodies and so are far less competitive and violent than men. If our governments consisted only of women they would be far less likely to settle differences between countries through warfare. Matriarchal governments are more likely to do what Winston Churchill once suggested, "Jaw – jaw is always better than war – war".
Female governments are also far more likely to create fairer societies. In the same way men are driven by a competitive instinct, women are driven by a maternal instinct. It is this that makes women want to give birth to children and then care for them until they are fully mature. Without this powerful instinct, the human race would quickly go extinct. It is also true of most animals, where the nurturing instinct of mothers ensures that the young stay alive until adulthood. It's the most important factor in the survival of many species.
In a female-dominated government, the main priority will not be the drive to compete against others for wealth and power, as in all patriarchal governments, it will be the welfare of everyone, particularly children. No matriarchal government will want to see the children of the country they rule live in poverty or ignorance. The desire to ensure that all children have equal education, health-care and opportunities in life will make for a much fairer society.
Many women claim that a matriarchal government would not copy the hierarchical system we find in all patriarchal societies. We know that men operate best when there is a clear pecking order of power, but it's disputed whether this is true of women. Generally, women are less aggressive than men and have better social and communication skills. They are far more able to co-operate with each other without needing a strong leader to tell everyone what to do.
Even if we had a very assertive and dominating woman becoming the leader of a matriarchal government, she would find it difficult to ignore the maternal concerns of the rest of her government. It would be far harder for her to lead the country into war unnecessarily or promote policies that foster inequality than if she was the leader of a patriarchal government. The majority of women in her government would oppose any decision to engage in conflict, even if the men supported it.
I'm sure that people like Steven Goldberg will ask the obvious question at this point. How do women, who are less assertive and competitive than men, get into positions of power? Why would they be even interested? Will they have to learn to act like men, or even take steroids to bump up their testosterone levels? It would be a waste of time if they did this, because as women like the British leader Margaret Thatcher have shown, their behaviour when in power may be exactly the same as any man. If this is the case, and it does seem to be, how can a government of caring and nurturing women be created?
To answer this, we have to look at the forms of government we have tried. Although every type of patriarchal government has failed to bring about a more peaceful and equal world, there has been one kind that has worked better than others; democracy. It allows the people of a country to get rid of an unpopular government without having a bloody revolution. It can also allow a matriarchal government to be voted into power if it receives enough popular support.
At present, if a woman has any political ambition she has to join a patriarchal political party and behave like an ambitious man, if she is to be taken seriously. But if a matriarchal party was created, women would be free to be themselves. They wouldn't have to work in a stressful testosterone- driven environment but in a more co-operative one, with similar-minded women.
Another big advantage of a matriarchal political party is that women will not have to support patriarchy any more, which they do at the moment because there is no apparent alternative. It will leave them free to point out just how badly men rule our world. The excuses men give for going to war or maintaining inequality in our societies will be laid bare and criticised, as they should be.
Patriarchal rule and war always seem to go to together. Patriarchal historians have problems in explaining why on earth this happens. The 1914-18 world war caused the deaths of over 16 million people with 20 million wounded, yet it was apparently brought about by the assassination of one just one man. Underlying stresses started a chain-reaction which caused most countries in Europe to take sides and begin hostilities. Even today, historians find it hard to find a sensible explanation of how and why this chain-reaction led to such a destructive conflict. It seems that testosterone-driven governments often find it very hard to stop themselves going to war, despite the misery and carnage that results.
We had an even more dangerous situation in the Cold War of 1947 to 1991 between the USSR and NATO. Both sides deployed enough nuclear weapons against each other to destroy human civilization many times over. It was a miracle that these patriarchal governments didn't start a nuclear war and it was only the economic collapse of the USSR that brought about an end to the conflict. The threat of nuclear war hasn't yet gone away, either, because it is very difficult to stop the spread of nuclear weapons and there is always going to be a madman somewhere who might be crazy enough to use them.
Patriarchal governments have shown themselves to be incompetent in dealing with other worldwide catastrophes, like over- population, pollution and global-warming. The biggest problem in finding a solution usually turns out to be the self-interest of powerful groups. This is true of patriarchal religions like the Roman Catholic Church or Islam who try to block sensible measures to overcome over-population. It also applies to large industries, like those involved in oil, coal or car manufacturing, who sabotage any attempts to tackle pollution and global warming. The selfish men who control all these powerful interest groups are more than willing to put their own interests before the welfare of the planet.
The same is true when we look at the large gap between rich and poor which has always existed in patriarchal societies. It is very difficult for testosterone-driven men to solve problems like poverty, because in a competitive, patriarchal world the game is all about winners and losers. Poor people are just losers and deserve no sympathy or help. To justify this position, 'winners' bring in evolutionary theory and claim it's all about, "the survival of the fittest". This in spite of the fact that the survival of any species of animal is far, far more dependant on the maternal instincts of the mother in giving birth and caring for her young, than the aggressive instincts of the male. To be frank, the survival of the human species would be much better served, if it was in the hands of caring and nurturing women, rather than competitive men.
If given the chance, any matriarchal political party could use all these powerful arguments to explain to voters what appalling job men do in ruling the world. We might then see matriarchy voted into power.
Patriarchy will naturally try counter-arguments, such as claiming that a matriarchal government will consist of wishy-washy pacifists and will therefore leave countries open to attack by other patriarchal governments. It's not true. Women are by nature far more security- minded than men. They have to be, to survive in a patriarchal world where they are routinely oppressed, robbed, raped or murdered by men. Women are even more aware of the dangers of patriarchy than men and will see the need for a strong defence.
Another claim will be that we need highly competitive men to make capitalism work, and capitalism is what brings us our wealth. But capitalism, when unchecked, leads to serious problems. Ruthless men gamble with our money and sometimes lose, big firms deliberately choke off competition in order to monopolise the market and the welfare of consumers comes a very poor second to the god of profit. We've seen the results of this very clearly in recent years. Governments have had to bail out "too big to fail" inefficient banks and large corporations, then impose austerity onto the taxpayers to pay for their mistakes.
If we tried to play a sport without rules and a referee to enforce them, the result would be a chaotic mess. The same is true in the game of capitalism, which desperately needs fair- minded politicians to manage it properly and avoid costly failures as well as unfair or uncaring business practices. Patriarchal governments have manifestly failed to do this, as we see all too clearly from the recent world-wide financial collapse. Matriarchal female politicians are far more likely to referee capitalism fairly. They will not be so caught up in its competitive games and its 'profit at any cost' side and can have a more dispassionate view.
This is why greatness needs to be thrust upon women. Men, if they are not born with the advantages of wealth and power, seek them out and believe they deserve them. Most women have very little interest in competing against men and even less interest in climbing the greasy pole to the top in politics. Because of their lack of aggression, they're likely to fail anyway. Really, their only way to succeed in a patriarchal political party is to be a substitute male. What they need instead is to belong to a matriarchal political party, which values their inclusiveness, ability to co-operate and desire to work for the good of everyone, not just vested interests. Then it's up to the voters whether they see them as a credible alternative to the tired old parties we already have.
Most people complain about politics and hate the fact that we still have wars, poverty and injustice. They can see that governments are deeply flawed at best and at worst, instruments of oppression, greed and intolerance. However, they still accept patriarchy because as far as they are aware, there is no other choice. Men have always ruled us and women see little chance of changing that, even if they had the will to do it. What we need is the kind of attitude change and fighting spirit which brought votes for women and led to the Feminist movement in the last half of the twentieth century. If the spirit of those times came back, we could have matriarchal political parties in no time, and voters would have real choice for once.
In the world as we know it now, women's maternal instinct can be a big disadvantage to them. They feel they have to choose between a career and motherhood, or exhaust themselves juggling both. Men generally have no such difficulties and can dedicate themselves to the advancement of their careers without hindrance. In truth, men are glad that women care about children so much. It leaves the field clear for them to climb the ladder of success while women agonise about the harm they might be doing to their children by working. Maternal feelings are still seen as a weakness, like most 'feminine' qualities, when they should be respected as the only way we manage to survive as a species. The same is true of the nurturing qualities many women exhibit when they take care of the sick, the elderly and the vulnerable. Their incredibly valuable work is viewed through the lens of the patriarchy, seen as unimportant and paid accordingly. Only the creation of wealth or the acquisition of power is applauded in a patriarchal society because it is men who decide what is important and what they value is achieving status through these things.
We need to change this male- dominated value system if we want to find solutions to war, poverty, oppression, pollution and global warming. Great religious figures have urged us for millennia to see others as ourselves and to put aside selfishness, intolerance and greed. We may have listened politely, but we haven't done much else. Now we have to realise that our difficulties can only be solved by a sea-change in what we hold dear. We need caring and loving people to rule our world, which, to be blunt, means women. If women are not willing to come forward to do this, because they lack the competitive instinct or feel they are not competent or worthy, then they should be told just how wonderful they are, and how much we need their skills, over and over, till they believe it. Greatness will have to be thrust upon them. Only when we do this will we have a chance of a better world in which nurturing, kindness and service are valued above conflict, aggression and competition. We should start now.