https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OyTTGMZ_6Js
GEORGE FOX STARTS THE QUAKERS - GETS ARRESTED
Wednesday, 11 February 2026
RASA SAYS: REAL CHRISTIANS; QUAKERS
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAuE1hxRZJY&t=100s
I WILL INCLUDE THIS SORT OF ACTIVITY IN OUR NEW ORDER
Tuesday, 10 February 2026
Hierarchy Is NOT A Dirty Word!
By Ajax the Great (Pete Jackson)
(Originally posted on the "Vive La Difference!" blog)
HIERARCHY. There is that word again, a word that means practically all things to all people. It gets loaded with all sorts of baggage depending on who you ask. But it is neither inherently good NOR bad.
The Oxford dictionary definition of hierarchy is, "a system or organization in which people or groups are ranked one above the other according to status or authority." The etymology is from late Middle English: via Old French and medieval Latin from Greek hierarkhia, from hierarkhÄ“s ‘sacred ruler’ (see hierarch). The earliest sense was ‘system of orders of angels and heavenly beings’; the other senses date from the 17th century. Since then, the word has been used to refer to all sorts of ranking systems, from clergy to military to business to politics to society and beyond.
There is apparently a dogma in some circles that Women don't really LIKE hierarchies at all. And while that dogma may have a kernel of truth (in that Women tend to have less of the classic libido dominandi, i.e. the "desire to dominate," than men do), it's mostly bunk. Rather, it's more the NATURE of the hierarchy and what it is used for.
Far from jettisoning it wholesale, Riane Eisler had noted long ago that there are two main kinds of hierarchies: hierarchies of domination (as seen in the dominator or authoritarian model), and hierarchies of actualization (as seen in the partnership or authoritative model).
Here is what Google has to say about it:
Hierarchies of domination and actualization differ in how power is used: domination systems rely on fear, force, and strict, top-down control to maintain inequity. In contrast, hierarchies of actualization (common in partnership systems) use power to empower others, fostering mutual respect, accountability, and growth.
Hierarchies of Domination (Authoritarian)
- Structure: Strict, rigid, and top-down, often found in both family and state, normalizing inequity.
- Mechanism: Maintained through fear, force, and violence.
- Focus: Power "over" others to control, bully, and treat lower rungs as means to an end.
- Outcome: High levels of sanctioned violence and suppression of human potential.
Hierarchies of Actualization (Partnership)
- Structure: Democratic and egalitarian, utilizing leaders/mentors to guide, not crush.
- Mechanism: Power is used to "empower" and "power with" others.
- Focus: Facilitating growth, creativity, and the fulfillment of potential.
- Outcome: Mutual respect, accountability, and valuing of care/nonviolence.
Comparison
- Goal: Domination seeks control; actualization seeks development.
- Context: Domination is often "authoritarian," whereas actualization is "authoritative".
- Impact: Domination hampers growth, while actualization promotes "mission-driven creativity".
While the "domination" approach is often ingrained, the shift to "actualization" represents a move toward partnership-oriented systems, where the goal is to foster human capacity rather than stifle it.
And there you have it. It would seem that Women would generally tend to prefer hierarchies of actualization rather than domination overall (while men tend to prefer hierarchies of domination, often to the point of a "king of the hill" game writ large, or perhaps a "pyramid scheme"). Note also that such a distinction should really be thought of as a spectrum rather than a binary, with many hierarchies falling somewhere in between in practice. Also note how the apparent absence of formal hierarchy can create a power vacuum, and we all know how Nature feels about vacuums! A sneaky, subtle, and informal hierarchy often develops in its place to fill the vacuum. Natch. And clearly, at least in the MINDS of men, Women absolutely MUST occupy the "alpha" position, even if only as a placeholder to keep men from occupying that position, regardless of what the actual hierarchy is like in practice.
In other words, the truth is of course far more nuanced and complex than "hierarchies of domination are great and the natural order of things!" or "all hierarchies are bad and inherently unethical!". And of course, such nuances don't fit easily onto a bumper sticker, T-shirt, or meme. But that doesn't make it any less true.
If one were to distill it into a meme, bumper sticker, or T-shirt slogan, the best one would probably be, "Hierarchy is NOT a dirty word! Even bonobos have hierarchies, just more evolved ones". (True by the way.)
Monday, 9 February 2026
Saturday, 7 February 2026
Friday, 6 February 2026
USE THE LINK-PETE I CAN SHARE LIKE THIS IF IT'S A BIG DEAL--NOT AS EASY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qi8nLp9Xv_Y&lc=Ugx33OM-oP5O8MOVLDJ4AaABAg.AQRKuaYyko-ASALMz0xR_P
FANTASTIC VIDEO ON BREAD - I HAVE SEEN IT & BOY DID I LEARN A LOT! JUST HIT THE LINK -
.jpg)
Wednesday, 4 February 2026
Tuesday, 3 February 2026
Healed of Cancer! Yippee!
.webp)
There’s a man with me who’s fat like Chares Laughton, &
for some reason, he’s important to me. We are near a table & chairs &
he’s facing away from them, I’m behind him & doing something unusual. I
have put on him my thin, short, soft pink bathrobe that I wear a lot & I
have the ties that I am putting across his chest somehow. I’m close behind him
& after a while he says,
“You’re just a tease”
and he lies down on his left side between two chairs at the
table.
The scene changes. It now seems like there’s some sort of
celebration. The people with me – friends – have all decided to spread out in
this very large room {like at least 75’ both ways}. They are all in chairs
& why they took on this formation, I have no idea. I’ve been rehearsing a song in honor of this Charles
Laughton guy where in the middle I sing a verse which is special to him. Was going
to do it with some kids – but they don’t know the lyrics, so we can’t do the song.
Charles has put himself into the middle of the room in my
‘Captain’s’ chair & somehow he’s shrunk so there’s room for me to put
something next to him in the seat. It’s
a large, beautiful GREEN PEPPER. Usually as a sign of good will you might give
someone an apple, so why the green pepper?
MEANING:
*{Two of the main symbols are your pink robe that you
put on Charles & your own Captain’s chair, where you sit for the pc each
day. Then there’s the song, a celebration, & the big bright very green
& shiny Green Pepper.
I would say this is a soul in Purgatory except for the
green pepper, which seems a sign of health on earth. This leads me to suspect
that you Anointed Bobby, who you prayed for on the phone yesterday to heal
him of esophagus cancer.
Putting
your robe on him is your MANTLE which is a sign of TOTAL SPIRITUAL POWER &
PINK is HAPPINESS. {In the pink}
He
isn’t sure about the healing taking pace – it seems too good to be true – so he
says you’re TEASING him, like puffing his hopes up. Between two chairs might
also be saying ‘not sure’ like between two ideas or beliefs, on his side might
say, which side {left would be negative, he begins that way} does he believe,
that he can be healed or not?
“Can’t
sing the song” might be saying you can’t claim the victory yet because you
don’t have backup or accompaniment, like other people to witness & confirm
this.
Him
in the Captain’s chair you usually occupy is another favorable sign. It’s like
the throne or the symbol of SPIRITUAL POWER again – this chair is like the
Throne of Grace, the King or Queen’s chair & now he’s in it so he’s
receiving the Grace & the Power.
.webp)
The
last bit is that lovely green pepper. Mother God, explain this please.
MG:
The beautiful green is the earthly life, now restored. He’s had trouble with
indigestion – eating – they put him on a special restrictive diet. He said he’s
been starving. So this is health food to say that he will be able to eat again
& be well.
ME:
Why is he Charles Laughton & fat?
MG:
Fatness refers to being attached to the earth plane. But as you prayed he
improved & by the time he was in the Captain’s Chair – not between 2 chairs
of doubt – he had SHRUNK. Captain’s chair was he gained confidence in the
spiritual Power, such as you have – he’s in your seat means he’s thinking like
you, being like you – “I am the Captain!” His human ego or sense diminished, he
humbled himself & believed you.
ME: Why did the friends spread out in the
giant room – why is the room so big?
MG:
The room got big as his MIND WIDENED-you spoke about the Infinite God again
& again, Infinite Love, Infinite Power. You got his mind on the BIG
PICTURE. Yes, he saw himself & especially his malady as little, but the
Power that could heal was BIG.
And
the last mystery took me a day to discern – PEPPER. Pepper is a STIMULANT!
Weeks ago {mid Jan. 2026} Heart Stops for Real
I was flying high up in the sky in my white airplane when
for some unknown reason, it stops in midair. The most frightening thing about
this is a black airplane with a very wide mouth stopped directly behind me,
& if this plane decides to move again it will ram right into me & kill
me.
So I wait in fear & suspense & thank God my plane
starts up again, so I’m saved.
MEANING:
*{I’d been pushing myself with some outdoor work that
day. I had the symptoms of heart trouble – pain in the left arm {that does
happen sporadically} & shortness of breath. When I went to sleep this says
my heart stopped & the wide-mouth black plane behind me was DEATH. But my
heart started up again so I was saved. No one believes me, but I imagine the
heart could stop half a minute or a minute or so without any damage to the
brain & start up again.}*
Monday, 2 February 2026
Sunday, 1 February 2026
Why We Need Matriarchy
Why We Need Matriarchy
William Bond goes to it:
Hi Rasa
I have developed my own THE BLUEPRINT
FOR THE ORDER. I don’t think I’ve said much that I haven’t said before I’ve
just put forward all my reasons why we need women to rule our world. Because
the only way matriarchy can gain power is to convince very large numbers of
people matriarchy is a great idea and start a powerful political
movement.
Rasa says: Not so fast. “Convince very large
numbers of people matriarchy is a great idea & start a powerful political
movement.” You & I have been trying to do that for 25 years in writing &
myself, before that in actions {female dominance actions that challenge
Patriarchy like nude beauty contests, female body building, Stripping for God
& dominatrix work} & yet it hasn’t worked. Unless we get through with a
best-selling book like ‘Feminine Mystique’ or have a 5 member family that
agrees to work together, {Emmeline Pankhurst}, gains other followers &
assaults Patriarchy with national publicity – we will not get the idea across.
My books, like yours, herald Matriarchy, but the New York Times will not review
my most controversial book – “The Man Whisperer” & s far I’ve not been able
to get the media interested in my books – but that could readily be because I
don’t have time to WORK on the MEDIA…..My health condition, no window to travel
in the last years, {when I was a stripper I traveled & there contacted the
media in each venue} & too busy writing & publishing to go on TV shows
or even work on Podcasts is the reason.
Therefore, unless someone else does it
we are unable to conince a large public toward Matriarchy – most don’t even
know what it is - they are ignorant, it’s not even reached the table.
And to do as you say & then a
political movement to follow would require a phenomenon such as that
accomplished by Pankhurst & Betty Friedan.
Rasa
William continues:
1. Matriarchy v patriarchy is not the same as women v men.
We know that there are many women who see men, “through rose
tinted glasses” and firmly believe men should rule the world. While at the same
time there are many men who worship women and want to be ruled and dominated by
them. So we cannot assume women will automatically favour matriarchy and men
will favour patriarchy, it’s more complicated than that. But the truth is, the
majority of people couldn’t care less if they are ruled by either men or women
or a mixture of both. All they care about is if their political leaders will
make their lives better. So all we need to do is to convince people they will be
better off, if they are ruled by matriarchal governments. And we must make it
clear matriarchy, means a government of only women.
Rasa says: OK,
interesting thought. People don’t care who rules, male or female, as long as
they make their lives better. But it’s
more complicated than that you say & I agree. There are many questions
here. How is it that it’s not the same as women vs men? In general, the gender
war is men & women. But there are partisans both ways, women pro men, men
pro women. You & Pete are pro women. So that can be discussed. When we were
on Face book some females jumped up attacking you, William, & claiming to
be Matriarchs & superior to men – but they were not. I told them you were
more of a Matriarch than they were.
Another issue is women in general do not
have a high opinion of the female – themselves included. They actually believe
men to be more competent & effective as leaders. I have seen this so many
times on the microcosm, it is sickening. But the truth is, men have been trained
to see themselves as the leader – the dominant, so they act the role. You can’t
put much confidence in a woman who‘s afraid – that’s the problem. They’ve been
squashed down, beaten, demoralized so long they lack the confidence of men
& so in effect, sometimes they CAN’T lead. It takes a confident, assertive
person to lead. And so many times because women aren’t assertive or aggressive,
no confidence is placed in them - they are not given a chance. There’s a lot of
WORK that has to be done to BOOST women up before they can be the Goddesses
they once were. They’ve been bred ‘down,’ men have been ‘bred up’ as far as
being top dog. This is a BIG discussion. People assume men were as they are for
say hundreds of thousands of years, ditto women. But they have both EVOLVED ;
CHANGED & some of the traits of both genders have to CHANGE AGAIN before we
can succeed with Matriarchy. To wit, males have to become less aggressive,
females moreso.There is another BIG factor – the extinction of males. Dr. Bryan
Sykes ssays 100k years, give or take 25k. But meanwhile, we have to life with
them as they diminish. The shrinkage of men will help usher in Matriarchy of
course. That is the ultimate solution not conjured my humans, but
supernaturally or naturally produced by Mother Nature. Dr. Bryan Sykes said
“human males were an experiment that did not work & so Nature is removing
them” {words not exact} Wow – did he say a mouthful - mistake indeed! And he
quoted some cases to prove how insane men are, & also re their nature, how
they do al they do to acquire women His book “Adam’s Curse – A Future without
Men” has a lot ot say.
From the
Internet:
“In his 2003 book, Adam’s
Curse: A Future Without Men,
Based on his research, here are the key
points of his argument:
·
The Failed Experiment: Sykes described
the male of the species as a "genetic parasite" and a
"long-running,, GM (genetically modified) experiment" that is not
working out well. He cited the "raging beast" of the Y chromosome as
being linked to aggression, violence, and destruction.
·
Decaying Y Chromosome: Sykes argued
that unlike other chromosomes, the male Y chromosome is incapable of repairing
itself through genetic recombination (crossing over). He called the Y
chromosome a "graveyard of rotting genes" that is "pitilessly
shrinking".
·
The 125,000-Year Timeline: Based on current
rates of mutation and declining sperm counts, Sykes predicted that the Y
chromosome will become completely extinct in about 125,000 years, rendering men
extinct.
· "Nature" Removing Them: Sykes suggested a "harsh Darwinian struggle" where female mitochondrial DNA may be actively working against male reproduction, such as by killing male fetuses. He noted that as the Y chromosome fades, reproduction could shift to a "unisex" model, similar to how some animals reproduce without males.” {end Rasa says}
William Bond
continues:
2. Why Patriarchy rule has been a disaster for everyone on the
planet.
Men and women are different because women give birth to children
and men don’t. And it’s because of this that women are controlled by the
feminine instinct and men are controlled by the masculine instinct. The
feminine instinct makes women want to give birth to children and then care and
nourish her children until they are able to look after themselves. On the other
hand, the masculine instinct is all about aggression and competition. We see
this clearly in nature where every year animals like stags, bulls, rams and
lions fight each other for dominance and access to females.
This problem is that male humans have similar instincts. Men
will compete and fight each other. This is not a big problem if men fight each
other in a boxing ring or compete in sporting games but it became a big problem
when very competitive men gain political power. So testosterone driven leaders
are willing to fight other testosterone driven leaders on the battle field
causing deaths and suffering of thousand or even millions of people. (like we
have seen in WW1 and WW2).
Also very competitive minded people do not care about fairness.
As the result we see a huge gap between rich and poor in nearly all patriarchal
countries. Competitive men have a, “the winner takes it all” mentality. To
them, life is a competitive game where the winners take everything and the
losers get nothing. The problem is that in the patriarchal system, the most aggressive
and competitive minded people far more likely to end up in leadership
positions. But these types of people are far more likely to want to go to war,
and not care about poverty in their own countries as they regard poor people as
“losers”. This is why there is a huge gap between rich and poor and why there
is poverty and homelessness even in wealthy countries.
Rasa says: In other words, males have no love – It’s
been bread out of them. Women wanted tough, aggressive men to protect them
& do hard work like a combination of pit bull, Cane Corso & Shire
horse. So they evolved as these were the type of men they bred with. But in
acquiring traits where they could KILL readily, hurt easily with no remorse,
these characters eventually stopped caring about women. They wanted to control
women, like Satan wanted to be equal to God. And there you have the birth of
Patriarchy.
What is love? Caring about others. They
could not be both at the same time – nurturing & killing. Why am I the only
one to see this? Breed someone to be a certain way, they might not be other
ways that are opposite.
About
dogs from the Internet:
The Turkish
Kangal and the Caucasian
Shepherd (Ovcharka) are widely considered the toughest, most
aggressive, and capable dogs to kill a wolf and stand their ground against a
bear. These livestock guardian breeds are specifically bred for fearlessness,
possessing massive size (up to 170 lbs) and immense bite force, often
protecting flocks from wolves and bears without retreating.
·
Turkish Kangal: Known for having the strongest
bite in the world, they are exceptionally effective at neutralizing wolf
threats and are feared by predators.
·
Caucasian Shepherd (Ovcharka): Renowned for
their extreme aggression and thick, protective coat, they are capable of taking
on wolves and large predators.
·
Central
Asian Shepherd (Alabai): A highly protective, strong, and
brave breed that excels at fighting off wolves.
·
Karakachan
Dog: An ancient, courageous breed often used in the mountains
to protect livestock from wolves.
These dogs are specialized guardians,
often standing their ground against large predators rather than fleeing.
Rasa continues: Some dogs are NOT
suited for family life – they are better in the fields. From the Internet:
·
Anatolian
Shepherd: Known for extreme independence and alertness, they
often require vast, open spaces and a "flock" to protect.
·
Great
Pyrenees: Specifically bred to live with sheep or other
livestock, they are intensely protective and may be too aloof or territorial to
thrive as a standard indoor pet.
·
Other Working Breeds: While not
strictly "only" for work, breeds like the Border
Collie (for herding) or Maremma
Sheepdog often require immense stimulation and space to avoid
becoming stressed in a sedentary home environment.
These dogs are bred to be independent
thinkers, often acting on instinct to defend, rather than following commands
like a typical companion dog. {end
Internet}
Rasa continues: My theory which is mine & mine alone,
is that women chose certain men for partners which eventually led to A CERTAIN
PERCENTAGE of them becoming toxic. In
general they are most – not all– less ‘caring’ than women, less nurturing.
There are exceptions to everything. Look at Jesus. One of the complaints I’ve
heard women voicing is ‘they are like machines.’ Stalin yearned to create an
army of male robots who were like that – hopefully it never happens although as
William points out they are so obedient they obey unto death when the
commanders tell them to do so. Rasa
William Bond goes on:
3. Why matriarchy is better than patriarchy.
As previously stated men and women are different because women
give birth and men don’t. Woman have what is called the maternal instinct. This
instinct drive women to want to have children and when her child is born to
want to nurture and care for it until it’s able to look after itself. But this
instinct drives women to go further than this. They we also care for the
children of other women, they will also care for the sick and elderly and this
is why the caring professions are dominated by women. Women also care deeply
for animals as well.
So in theory the world would be a better place if its ruled by
caring women driven by their maternal instincts. But unfortunately life is far
more complicated than that. As previously pointed out, the problem with
patriarchy is that the more aggressive and competitive minded people end up in
positions of power. But when women got involved in politics in the 20th century
then we also find that the most aggressive and competitive minded women also
get into positions of power. Well known examples of this are women like
Margaret Thatcher, Indira Gandhi and Angela Merkel. Unfortunately, although
these were very competent leaders none of them demonstrated they were caring
women and ruled exactly the same as what a male leader would do.
The reason for this is any women becoming part of a patriarchal
political system has to demonstrate she is, “one of the boys”, if she has any
political ambition. So she has to squash any maternal instincts she has and
prove she is as ruthless and devious as any male politician. This then is why
we need matriarchal political parties where women are encouraged to demonstrate
their caring and maternal instincts. So women can get into positions of power
within the party by not being ruthless, devious and aggressive, but by simply
demonstrating they are intelligent, caring and loving people.
Patriarchy likes to claim that, “love is a weakness”, and this
is true within the very ruthless, Machiavellian games of patriarchal politics.
But love becomes a very potent weapon when used by a matriarchal political
party. The point is that the people want to be ruled by rulers who care about
the people they rule. They do not want to be ruled by men who start wars with
other countries and only serve the needs of wealthy men who bribe them to do
their bidding. So a matriarchal party can win great support from the public by
positioning themselves as a party of loving, caring and incorruptible
women.
Rasa says: I
think we agree that Matriarchy is a slow process to develop. We don’t have it
yet. And so some of the women who move up will be shysters, liars, hypocrites
& generally exactly like the evil men. Women are murderers to but not as
many as men. And so, after a long time, when women have gained a strong
foothold, these evil types will not get ahead so easily. We do know that women
in general are psychic & have ESP. And they have dreams & visions, like
I have. So at that time when more than half the goverments are women, the women
that come forward are less likely to fool the public & become liars &
criminals. Of course, in this Patriarchal world as it is now, when a woman
becomes Commander in Chief, she’ll have to deploy troops for war – she cannot
be a pacifist if the country is in danger.
Rasa
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)