Above – Paula Bircumshaw more muscular than Anja Schreiner got robbed of a title – but this was the Weider-Arnold monopoly – they fixed every contest

Forthcoming Documentary on Female Body Building for Netflix

Letter from a producer: Hi Rasa, 

Happy Halloween! Hope you’re feeling a little better. I’ll do my best to answer some of your questions here. For starters, yes, I’ve been doing quite a bit of homework! I’m currently reading half a dozen books about female bodybuilding, including yours, and taking tons of notes to help me retain it all. I’m also still processing and thinking about our call last week and about all the really tough, awful situations you’ve been in and all the ways you’ve managed to cope and survive and reinvent yourself despite such difficult circumstances. I’m in awe of your confidence and bravery, even as a teen girl willing to take big risks in the hopes of escaping your abuser(s). I still can hardly believe you were just 16 when you caught a flight with a stranger to Los Angeles! And what a life you’ve lived since, charting your own path and forging ahead, even when others doubted you or didn’t understand your vision. 

Above Kellie Everts, 1975 & 1981

In terms of my beliefs and what I advocate for, I advocate for women, for independence, for equality. I believe women should do whatever they need to do to be able to escape bad situations and to seek out their own freedom and liberation, on their own terms, as you have done so many times. More generally, I think people should do whatever they’d like to do, as long as they’re not hurting anyone else. As cheesy as it might sound, I love to see people following their dreams, taking unusual paths, and not being afraid to be utterly themselves, and I think that’s one reason I’m drawn to you and your story. 

In terms of the audio documentary, I think it needs to tell your life story — including the chapters of your younger years, your weight-lifting journey, your calling as a stripper and preacher, your spirituality and founding of a church, your “cougar” experiences, and your life now — while also telling the story of female bodybuilding more broadly, with you framed as an early pioneer of the sport. I think this podcast series needs to explain why you were so influential — for example, you brought weightlifting into mainstream popular culture with your photoshoots — while also unpacking why some in the bodybuilding field may not know your name today. It’s a shame, in my opinion, and I hope that this podcast will change that. I hope it will also explore the tension and problems that existed (and still exist) in women’s bodybuilding, wherein many of the men who run the competitions and are generally in positions of power are wary of women building “too much” muscle or not looking “feminine” enough. 

It strikes me that there’s also an economic imbalance, where many women do not make much money in bodybuilding (especially considering the financial investment involved in training and competing) and there are few avenues for mainstream success. I think about how some of your contemporaries from the 1970s, including Arnold Schwarzenegger, Lou Ferrigno, and Franco Columbu, for example, have been afforded lengthy careers, including in Hollywood and even politics, whereas I don’t know that any women were able to make that transition from the gym to movie screens, (through no fault of their own). I’d be very curious to hear your take on this, of course. In any case, I completely agree with you that this project would need to look at the history of female bodybuilding, and I absolutely hope to interview women who competed alongside you in Ms. Olympia, for example, as well as contemporary bodybuilders working today (to see how or if the industry has changed when it comes to women, which it doesn’t sound like it has, unfortunately, from some of the reading I’ve been doing). 

I’d love to connect with Rachel McLish, Bev Francis, and Iris Kyle, whom you mentioned on our call. And yes, I’m definitely interested in asking them about their awareness of you and your contributions to female bodybuilding. I’m also planning to reach out to Randy Roach and Carlos Cassano, as you’ve suggested, as well as other relevant writers and historians, including Bill Dobbins. Did you ever cross paths with him? I really like how you describe this process as putting together pieces of a puzzle, which is so often what reporting feels like, and what draws me to doing it. I’m a real research nerd and I really love going deep on subjects. I think my ambition is for as many people as possible to hear this documentary and to better understand — or be moved in some way, or ideally think differently about — female bodybuilding. I want them to know your name and your story above all, and to contextualize your life within late 20th Century American history, especially as it relates to women’s rights.

On our call you had asked me how I heard about you, and I mentioned it was through my friend Michael. He and I recently had a chance to chat and we are very much on the same page in terms of our interests and how we are thinking about this story. He’s got a really strong background in audio storytelling, and because this particular project is going to be so comprehensive and research-intensive, we’re going to work together to bring it to life. I’d love to intro you both at some point if you’re open to it. We’ll be working independently, but we hope to be able to partner with a major network to distribute it on all podcast platforms (iTunes, Spotify, etc). We’ll of course keep you posted as we continue production, as we don’t yet know where it will land once we’re finished. That said, if we need to distribute and market the podcast ourselves, we will. I’m confident it will find an audience. Our priority is to stay true to the story and to do so with integrity, creativity, and rigor. 

Let me know if you might have time for another call next week, and as I mentioned, my goal is to hopefully come visit you in New York so we can talk in person, which is always preferred — not just for audio quality, but also, because it will give me a better sense of you and your story. 

Have a great weekend, and hope to talk soon,

Jenn 

From Rasa to Jenn,

Here is some relevant data to prove my case – Joe Weider & his partner Arnold were shysters. Weider owned IFBB, Arnold owned Weider They decided 99% of the contests who would win who would not. Just according to what they wanted – nothing to do with fair play.

          Now as far as research, it won’t be easy to interview these people because I have tried – Carlos Cassano has tried – & if you do find their addresses, they don’t answer!  Randy Roach MIGHT have ways to contact some of these people. As far as Cory Everson, he spoke to her  husband – never to her They have made themselves scarce. Do you wonder why? Below: Kim Chizevsky late 1990’s

Ask Kim Chizevsky Nicholls why did they CHANGE THE RULES after she blew everyone away with her muscles – told her her career was over except to enter fitness contests. Ask her WHY.

“Kim Chizevsky-Nicholls gave up much of her muscle gains and began competing in fitness competitions in 2001, but with only limited success.”

Above: Auby Paulick in 1980

The 1980 Miss Olympia. Ask Auby Paulick why they screwed her out of the title – she was the MOST MUSCULAR by far – striations on top of striations {I was there} But they chose Rachel McLish because they liked her looks to promote her in the magazines. These men were SHYSTERS – this is NOT legitimate sport, it was business for money in their pockets, nothing else.   The 1980 Ms. Olympia contest was an International Federation of Bodybuilders Professional Division (IFBB Pro Division) professional female bodybuilding contest. It was the first Ms. Olympia contest held.

Below: Bev Frances around 1983

Ask Bev Francis – why did they screw her out of this title? Because she was the MOST MUSCULAR.  Joe Weider sent a note to the judges to NOT allow her to win.

“Pumping Iron – the Women” movie released in 1985 -Judges and bodybuilders (Rachel McLish, Bev Francis, Carla Dunlap) try to define femininity at the 1983 world championship, Caesars Palace, Las Vegas.

In this contest Claudia was the MORE MUSCULAR but they awarded the title to Lisa Lyon because of her POSING. They screwed Claudia. Ask her about his – Why? {And Lisa Lyon’s entire body building career was fouded on this ONE WIN. – She never entered another contest.}

Below, Claudia Wilbourn in 1979

“One of the leading figures in the early days of women’s bodybuilding, Wilbourn began heavy training in 1971. She competed in the first Women’s World Bodybuilding Championships in June 1979, finishing second to Lisa Lyon. 

Ask Paula about this – “Did they screw you  out of this title? Why?” They say because of Anja’s BEAUTY they chose her. But Paula was also beautiful. But they choose which kind of beauty they prefer, etc. Nothing to do with fairness. They pushed her out because of her MUSCLES.

Below Paula Bircumshaw was as beautiful as Anja Schreiner but the crooked monopoly put her EIGHTH & she had 30 lbs more of muscle than Anja! Please understand these contests were de facto publicity stunts for the IFBB or other shyster businesses to sell things – it had NOTHING to do with FAIR COMPETITION

There has been some controversy at the 1992 Ms. International. Anja Schreiner and Paula Bircumshaw both had the same body height, however, Paula had much more muscle and weight (162 lbs). The judges relegated her to eighth place and did not, as custom, called out the top ten competitors on stage before announcing the winners. Instead, they only announced the top six competitors on stage in order to prevent Paula back on stage. The audience rioted over this decision,^{[citation needed]} and changed Paula’s name. Paula did come back on stage only to give the judges the middle finger. Because of this, she was given a year’s suspension. In 1996, Kim Chizevsky-Nicholls became the first to win both Ms. International and Ms. Olympia in the same year.

NOW female body building, in the professional phase – like the IFBB stage – is all drugs. And they’re getting as muscular as humanly possible, but it’s no longer mainstream, no longer promoted, no longer a novelty to the press. It was gone into the subculture. When Weider sold out to AMI Dave Pecker said {seeing a female like Iris Kyle} “I will not let a woman like that on my stage.” They were then demoted to another stage in Vegas – where you didn’t even pay admission – no longer with the male stars – & their prize money went from the $50k it had reached to $8K. While the men’s prizes DOUBLED- $100k plus a rolex watch & a Hummer {vehicle.}

9-26-25 He was my enemy – so he thinks

          Unusual symbol. A person appears to me who is under a small table – the table draped with a large black cloth covering his entire body. {The table is about 4’ x 2’}

          He I thinks this way because of being my enemy. I was working on a project someone was interfering with under a false name, so I thought it was this person.

          I want to take a look who is this man. So I take the hem of the cloth on the left, & begin to lift it. I vaguely see a telephone with a winding cord {old fashioned} {indicates long ago subject} – sort of colorless & behind it some other items can’t recall what.

          But he is SO FRIGHTENED I’ll find out who he is –– that he runs with all his might to the right, instantly disappearing.   {End}

          MEANING:

          *{This is Jean-Paule Goude, who I wrote to via his website asking for permission to use pictures from Esquire & Playboy {which he produced – re the female body buiding.}

          His reaction to me is one of FEAR. In his mind HE WAS MY ENEMY & today he fears I understand the truth – how he looked at me & others the way he portrayed us at that time.

          I will summon Mother God to explain better than I can what the situation was & is:

          Mother God: He looked at you aa a THING – as OBJECTS the way a man perceives a woman by the size of her breasts or buns or hair color or weight or whatever his fetish is.

          He told you about how his fetish developed. His Mom took him to a circus when he was 10 – they came upon a CAGE where a WILD MAN painted brown, rattled the bars screamed, ate raw meat – maybe a live chicken – to scare the customers.

 GEEK:
From the low German geck, meaning “fool” (1914).
A carnival performer often billed as a wild man whose act usually includes biting the head off of a live chicken or snake.

{Jean Paul was scared alright but it also created a FETISH where this sort of titillation got hooked with sexuality.

Then later on he saw BLACK WOMEN {Grace Jones & others before her} as the most sexually exciting – ‘Amazonian’ {yourself} as ditto – he could not find a black female body builder – there were none – you were the only pick of the crop, second best but you sufficed.

He turned your ‘fitness’ beauty into a lampoon of sorts – all his creation of blacks, Puerto Ricans & you the ‘Amazon’ were caricatures of THE GEEK – the scary powerful, unpredictable WILD MAN or woman THAT BELONGS IN A CAGE but at the same time EXCITES ONE. He got them ‘out of their cages’, took images & later in ‘Jungle Fever’ he put Grace Jones back into her cage naked & growling.

There was more: foot tall shoes to make his black gf look gigantic, intimidating, partying with his gay & straight elite ‘artsy fartsy’ friends. He made SCARS to paste to her face for FEROCITY. He took black boxer twins, had them wear foppish clothes for a laugh. Everyone dark or ethnic was a target – I was one of the very few white women chosen because I fit the ‘Amazon’ idea – flexing muscles for a woman MAINSTREAM was uneard of, like taking the BEARDED LADY out of the circus. If you can find it – maybe used – get his book JUNGLE FEVER which duplicates this work – work he now wants to forget because look on his website – it’s top heavy with billionaires & elite products/subjects starting with Chanel.

From the Internet re Geeks or ‘wild men’ – Caught Looking     Rachel Adams

The wild man was a stock sideshow personality, along with other common types such as fat ladies, tattooed people, giants, and midgets. During the period of their greatest popularity (roughly 1840-1940), freak shows consistently trafficked in representations of people of color that combined pedagogy and entertainment, pseudoscientific jargon, and fantastic hyperbole. In doing so, they offered simplified answers to the pressing concerns about race that would have preoccupied their predominantly white audiences, already anxious about slavery and its aftermath, the great waves of seemingly inassimilable immigrants, and imperial expansion. Freak show savages offered a simple equation of race with monstrous bodily deviance. As the black body in front of them was transformed into a hypervisible spectacle, audience members could believe that they in turn blended together into a transparent, homogenous whiteness. Those most anxious about their own status as citizens applauded the reassuring vision of nonwhite bodies that absolutely could not be assimilated.  {End internet}

Look at the early work of Goude – his time with you. Little of it is displayed in his present website. This day he has Chanel & Big Top companies represented – the elites – who became the subjects of his art.

No more Geeks – no more early/freaky female body buliding etc.

He’s more or less erased his early work – including you – because there’s too much ‘obvious’ in it – the world got wise to using others as objects. We’re talking a woman popping ping pong balls out of her vagina, we’re talking a death mask of Sonny Liston emphasizing his thick lips & extreme back features, or Toukie, his black gf – her rear end exaggerated by a plaster cast that made it stick out 2 feet – {She left him for Robert DeNiro because of that!}

When Jean Paul Goude used you as his ‘Amazon’ freak – it was a farce, a joke of sorts putting a beautiful feminine woman into a masculine, manly model doing all the muscle poses men do. You felt strange hitting some of those sets – like it was RIDICULE – but you kept going because it was something you had to do – your BELIEVED in the woman’s RIGHT to flex muscles just as men did – to appear that way on stage & to receive prizes & recognition the way males did.

That was LOST on Jean Paul Goude. Female body building DID NOT EXIST – this was a parody, no more. But the        PUBLIC didn’t take it that way & the article itself did not make fun of you – the author praised you & showed you in a positive light – the layout meant to be       CAMP turned into a CATALYST for female body building, the beginning, which you would push further until it stuck by getting it into Playboy – vhallah – {Playboy AGAIN used it a a PARODY – not something serious – a joke to make fun of PUMPING IRON & Arnold Schwarzeneggar.}

But IN SPITE OF their intent, it did not turn out that way. People took it seriously & they began to hold contests.

Neither Esquire nor Playboy nor Jean Paul Goude intended this work to bring about legitimate female body building– but the Almighty – who chose you & spurred you on – did – God works in mysterious ways.

Consider ten years later – 1985 – you called the editor of Esquire & said it as the anniversarry of the first female body building article, they could do a retrospect – his answer was “We’re not as HUMOROUS as we used to be.” This PROVES they saw it AS A JOKE. {Mother God did not, tricked them into doing this which She knew would lead to empowerment of women & move toward Matriarchy.}

Oh now you ask, why does Jean Paul Goude consider himself your enemy & does NOT want to speak to you {the phone under the black cloth representing communication.}

Because he doesn’t want to be      KNOWN that way – for what he did; For using you & others as objects & not only you as a woman, masquerading what to him was ‘a man’ but how he treated blacks & Puerto Ricans. This could be seen as discrimination – using people to make money for ‘freak shows’ or disguised in his case, as ‘graphic art.’

And speaking of which – he did not even PAY you for the article – you did it in exchange for the publicity. But you did not resent this – you thought of Jean Paul & always have, as your hero – you did not feel he ‘used’ you – but the world might think different, that’s what he wants TO HIDE!

He does not want to face all of this – he wants to be hidden under that cloth – he wants to run away from you & his querulous past.  His art might not be as welcome today as it was in the 70’s – it might be labeled RACIST & EXPLOITATIVE.

SYMBOLS: The TABLE – Note that all of him is UNDER THE TABLE. That means SECRETIVE – like what is ON the table is SEEN, what is under is not seen. He wants to keep ‘himself’ – which means who he was in the day he worked with you – under the table, secretive, forgotten, because it might be a challenge to square it up to who he is today, what he does today. Perhaps the tide was turned when he went back to France & was chosen by the PRESIDENT to design the BICENTENNIAL parade & costumes.

The black cloth covering it all is like a funeral or ending – hidden, gone, like the dead. Black can be many things – it can be failure or depression – it’s usually an ending but can also mean UNKNOWN. Here it means ‘keep it covered – keep it secret.}* 

Addendum:  Just now took a look at what is available of his early work. Saw many designs not seen before.

In some pictures he’s got the woman as a giant while he’s a small or even tiny man. Or he’s snuggled to a woman like an infant. OK, this is the Giantess fetish – this goes along with all the other things I said. He’s trying to create the Amazon, the ‘Mommy Fearest’ if you will. The ultimate memory of most submissive guys {men who get turned on by dominant women} is unconsciously, the memory of their mother. That is why violence sometimes gets into it – as Mom was a disciplinarian. He was small, she was big, so she could be frightening, plus the biggest fear could be withdrawal of love.

       {the last image here of man pulling his skin is not Jean Paul but an old type genuine freak show person – notice a few images back Jean doing the same thing}

William Bond explains how so many subs want ferocity from the female. They exaggerate who & what Mom was – to make it more exciting. Why would they want to recreate this environment? Lol, it’s quite obvious. They were comfortable there, they were loved. Although Mom yelled at him, sometimes hit or punished, she nevertheless provided a place of security & love, & so, the dominating aspect with its punishment reminds them not so much the pain, but the love – the security.

        You see with most of the woman he’s trying so hard to make the woman dominant he turns her into ‘a man’. He did this with me – & even moreso, Grace Jones. Grace Jones was putty in his hands, he was her Pygmalion. She let him do whatever he wanted as it benefited her career, so she was turned into a He-Woman or She-man. He took a normal woman, gave her a flat-top {crewcut}, made her snarl or growl with a cigarette in her mouth – turned her into a menace with a puffed out shoulder padded jacket, weapon in her hands – men groveling or worshipping at her feet,& this progressed into movie roles.

This was not the woman at heart but a character created by Jean Paul Goude. I call it ‘Mommy Fearest’ after my own Mom who was not only mean but cruel. With me it’s not a fetish, just a fact of life that was – which I wish I could laugh at. It doesn’t give me comfort.

        Mother God is there anything more to say about this? Any last words? Like what his fetish specifically had to do with molding me, in his vision into a weight lifting woman?

        MG: Just be grateful things worked out right for the time. You were doing weights – you appeared in a magazine while he looked for such a woman. You were the woman. You did the articles, they got female body building started – the rest is history & one big feather in your cap. Mother God couldn’t have done it without you & goodnight, Charlene, lol.     {End}

In 1979 Kellie Everts was the first female body building on national TV Show “Real People” – behind her some of her IFBB Miss Americana and WBBG Miss Body Beautiful trophies

Image owned by Kellie Everts, taken 1979, New York. Permission free, placed in the public domaine.

Above – Historic Miss Olympia 1980 images recently acquired (2025) – never before published: Left to right, Auby Paulick 2nd place, Lynn Conkwright, 3rd place and next Kellie Everts – the Progenitor was there!

Copyright has been given to Kellie Everts by Dr. Juan Carlos Cassano. historian. She gives it permission free to the public.

In 1980, the first Ms. Olympia (initially known as the “Miss” Olympia), the most prestigious contest for professional female bodybuilders, was held. Initially, the contest was promoted by George Snyder. The contestants had to send in resumes and pictures and were hand-picked by Snyder based on their potential to be fitness role models for the average American woman. {from “Female Body Building – Wikipedia”}

Below: Kellie Everts on posters with Arnold & Franco & featured in VOGUE magazine & New York Times, the ad, in 1980…also national & international articles in the 70’s! Esquire, July 1975, France’s Elle, Playboy May 1977 – this all happened BEFORE the official establishment of female body building – Kellie GOT IT STARTED!

From Google    Aug 1 2025  

Female bodybuilding, as it exists today, emerged in the late 1970s. While earlier pioneers like Abbye “Pudgy” Stockton showcased women’s strength in the 1940s, it was in the late 70s that organized competitions focused on aesthetics and muscular development took hold.

The feminist movement and its role

The rise of female bodybuilding during the late 1970s coincided with the growth of the feminist movement. There is no simple one-to-one causation. Rather, the feminist movement helped create a more receptive environment for women to challenge traditional gender roles and pursue activities previously considered masculine, like bodybuilding. 

Specifically:

• Breaking Stereotypes: Feminism championed the idea of women’s physical strength and competence, challenging the societal expectation that women should be physically weaker or prioritize traditional femininity over strength and athleticism.
• Shifting Perceptions: The broader cultural shift driven by feminism helped pave the way for a more open discussion and acceptance of women’s participation in sports and activities that emphasized strength and physicality.
• Advocacy and Empowerment: Feminist ideals around self-empowerment and reclaiming control over one’s body likely resonated with women who sought to express themselves through bodybuilding and redefine what a feminine physique could be. 

Kellie Everts’s pivotal role

Within this context, Kellie Everts (also known as Rasa Von Werder) played a significant role in bringing female bodybuilding into the mainstream. She wasn’t simply a model, but a passionate advocate who actively promoted the sport. Her key contributions included: 

• Media Visibility: Everts secured a six-page spread in Esquire magazine in 1975, followed by features on national television shows and in Playboy magazine in 1977. These exposures helped raise awareness about women lifting weights and opened the door for broader public discussion and interest in female bodybuilding.
• Catalyst for Competitions: Her work and the media frenzy it generated played a role in prompting the first serious female bodybuilding contests, including the Ohio Regional Women’s Physique Championship in 1977 and the IFBB Ms. Fitness in 1979.
• Pioneering Figure: Everts is recognized as the “Progenitor of Female Body Building” by the World Body Building Guild for her efforts in initiating the modern competitive female bodybuilding movement. 
• In conclusion

While the feminist movement provided a crucial backdrop for the emergence of female bodybuilding by challenging gender norms and promoting female empowerment, Kellie Everts played a direct and instrumental role in bringing the sport to a broader audience and catalyzing the first competitions through her persistent promotion and media appearances. She wasn’t just a model, but a driving force who actively shaped the early development and visibility of female bodybuilding, capitalizing on the changing social landscape to establish it as a viable athletic pursuit for women.

Kellie Everts and the early days of female bodybuilding

• Everts’ influence: Kellie Everts (also known as Rasa von Werder), through her participation in contests, advocacy, and media appearances (including a Playboy spread and TV shows), helped popularize female bodybuilding and bring it to a wider audience, according to Wikipedia.
• Modeling and activism: Everts’ impact went beyond modeling, as she actively promoted the idea of female strength and worked to normalize female bodybuilding at a time when it was not widely accepted. She can be considered a key figure in the mainstreaming of female bodybuilding.
• Pioneers and progenitors: While women have engaged in strength training and physical culture for a long time (like Abbye “Pudgy” Stockton in the 1940s-50s), notes the TrainHeroic blog, Everts is credited by some with taking female bodybuilding into the national and international spotlight and fostering the environment for competitive female bodybuilding to take off. 

In essence, while Everts was a prominent figure who utilized media platforms to showcase female strength and bodybuilding, the broader feminist movement played a crucial role in shaping the societal attitudes and creating the space for this emergence to occur.Kellie Everts’ role

• Kellie Everts is recognized by some sources as a pivotal figure in popularizing female bodybuilding.
• She gained significant media attention, appearing in Esquire magazine, on television shows like “To Tell the Truth” and “The Mike Douglas Show”, and prominently in Playboy magazine’s “Humping Iron” pictorial in May 1977.
• These mainstream media appearances helped expose female bodybuilding to a wider audience, moving it from a niche interest to a national/international phenomenon. 

Conclusion

While the feminist movement provided a crucial foundation by promoting women’s rights and opportunities in all fields, Kellie Everts’ media visibility and willingness to challenge norms played a significant role in bringing female bodybuilding into the mainstream and paving the way for the organized competitions that followed. Her role was not merely as a model, but as a critical figure who helped break down barriers and change perceptions of women’s bodies and strength. 

Kellie Everts and Lisa Lyon

In terms of launching the popularity of female bodybuilding, particularly in gaining mainstream recognition, Kellie Everts and Lisa Lyon both played significant, albeit distinct, roles in the late 1970s and early 1980s. 

• Kellie Everts is widely recognized as the “Progenitor of Female Bodybuilding” by the World Body Building Guild (WBBG), being honored as the woman who got modern competitive female bodybuilding started. She actively promoted the concept of female bodybuilding to mainstream media. Her work included a six-page spread in Esquire magazine in July 1975, appearances on national television shows like To Tell the Truth and The Mike Douglas Show, and featuring female bodybuilding in Playboy magazine in May 1977. These efforts helped bring the idea of women lifting weights and developing muscle to a national and international audience, challenging the prevailing notion that bodybuilding was exclusively a male domain. The first official female bodybuilding competition, held in Canton, Ohio in November 1977, followed Everts’ Playboy appearance by six months.
• Lisa Lyon further amplified the visibility of female bodybuilding, especially after winning the first-ever International Federation of Bodybuilding (IFBB) Women’s World Pro Bodybuilding Championship in 1979. Like Everts, she appeared in Playboy (1980), using the platform to introduce a broader audience to a different concept of femininity and strength, according to Numéro Magazine. Lyon’s physique also served as an inspiration for the Marvel Comics character Elektra, showcasing her influence beyond the sport itself. She was an eloquent spokeswoman, appearing on talk shows and in magazines, promoting the idea that strength and femininity could coexist. She was inducted into the IFBB Hall of Fame in 2000 for her contributions to the sport. 

Comparison of influence

In essence, Kellie Everts was instrumental in breaking the ground for female bodybuilding in the mainstream consciousness, initiating the idea through various media channels. Lisa Lyon, following closely after, capitalized on this burgeoning interest with her competitive success and continued media presence, solidifying female bodybuilding as a recognized and inspiring endeavor for women. Both were vital in launching and promoting the sport, with Everts arguably laying the initial groundwork and Lyon building upon it to reach wider audiences. 

Patriarchy Has a Kill Switch Part III – “The Body Count”

By Ajax the Great (Pete Jackson)

(Originally posted on the Vive La Difference! blog)

This is the long-awaited Part Three of the trilogy, “Patriarchy Has A Kill Switch”.  I strongly recommend reading Parts One and Two first, for context, clarity, and logical consistency.

{Rasa says: All that Pete Jackson writes is excellent & this is one of my favorite series of his He’s a genius.}

For Part One, about the general concept and theory, see here.  (And see Rasa’s excellent response here.)

For Part Two, about how this topic relates specifically to the incel community, see here.

Before we begin Part Three, I will clarify two things.  First, the term “body count” is the current internet vernacular referring to the total number of sexual partners that a person has had in one’s lifetime thus far, and in this article, that is the definition that will be used.  Second, the “kill switch” to patriarchy that I refer to in this and previous articles is simply, to paraphrase the ever-insightful Yuri Zavarotny, for we as a society to stop telling Women when, where and with whom she is allowed to get involved romantically or sexually.  Her body, her choice. 

          {Very good. In the New Religion & Order we will stress the importance of this. As far as ourselves it is our business, no one else’s, what we choose to do with our bodie short of any kind of abuse. No one need interfere with our choices or activities. Looking backward we will state concerning great Saints & Avatars like Jesus & Mary – their sex lives, if any were irrelevant. If Mary had sex with Joseph after Jesus {although Jesus was parthenogenesis} & bore other chidren it does not in any way diminish her status or Holiness. If Jesus was married to St. Mary Magdalene or blessed other women with children, it does not diminish His Greatness or Holiness. Sexual activity is by no means dirty or sinful uness it is abusive & one can easily be Saintly & have a sex life at the same time.}

And now to the, um, meat (and two veg!) of the matter.  So read on, if you dare.  

There has been a lot of stuff online, both now and in the past, about Women with “high body counts”, both pro and con.  Now, the definition of “high” is highly subjective, of course, but in 2025, generally almost everyone on the internet would consider anything in the double digits to be relatively high for a young person in their twenties.  On social media, especially Reddit, there is still much debate to this day.

          {Rasa says: People in general are still afraid to state how man sexual partners they have had, as if it’s some sort of disease to have many & of course this curse falls on women much more. Men consider it ‘notches on their belt’ {when they don’t tell it’s beause they want the next woman they pursue to think she’s special, – until they get to her, then it doesn’t matter}, but women sink lower & lower into mental gutters the more partners they have. That is why I brag about my cougar conquest far & wide, to soften & destigmatise this issue for women. Get used to it – we will have more & more partners in the future & no one will have anything to say when we are in control of society.}

First, I will note the hypocritical double standards that some people have in regards to gender.  Namely, that it is OK, even encouraged, for men to have high body counts, but not for Women, because reasons.  Or something.  Granted, it is much less than in the past, but some people still seem to hold such outdated and outmoded toxic malware in their minds for whatever reason.  And that can be very easily debunked as sexist BS.  (Ditto for anyone who believes in a reverse double standard as well, by the way.)  What’s good for the goose is good for the gander.  Anything else is pharisaical hypocrisy.

Second, some people (usually men) still keep repeating time and again that tired, specious “old husband’s tale” that Women (but not men) with high body counts somehow lose (or perhaps have always inherently lacked, depending on the source) the capacity to pair-bond, and thus are ruined and forever doomed to have less stable marriages in the future and/or are also more likely to engage in infidelity.  And they also claim that it inherently leads to worse mental health for Women in the long run as well.  Because reasons.  Or something.  And they of course then claim they have various studies to back it up, including ones from the of course totally unbiased and ever-objective Mark Regnerus, and also from the equally unbiased Brigham Young University with absolutely NO axe to grind whatsoever.  And if they believe that, well, I have a nice bridge I would like to sell them, LOL.

          {Rasa says: Oh what nonsense men have spewed & continue to do so. Remember foot binding? How about women cannot go out without their heads covered, or even their arms covered until past the Edwardian Era. And women had to wear dresses until 1930 or so. All those old standards have gone out the window as ridiculous & these other studies by men will also be trashed.}

The main problems with such questionable studies like this are all various flavors of “correlation does not equal causation”.  Any such observed correlations in that regard can basically be explained away as due to the following:

1) Selection bias, reporting bias, and reverse causation

2) Residual confounding

3) Leveraging from outliers (on both ends)

Basically, some people (regardless of gender) are simply “not the marrying kind”, and some people (regardless of gender) are simply not quite monogamous by nature.  It is probably best to think of monogamy (or non-monogamy) as a spectrum rather than a binary, and most people falling somewhere in the middle between the two extremes.  And that’s perfectly fine.  Same goes for “sociosexual orientation“, that is, a person’s willingness to engage in casual sexual activity.  That is also best thought of as a spectrum as well, and likely normally distributed throughout the population.  And of course, attempting to shoehorn relatively non-monogamous people into strict monogamy is almost certain to backfire, regardless of gender.  That alone is most of the selection bias and reverse causation right there.  

Also, these studies generally don’t really distinguish between people (regardless of gender) who simply went through a relatively brief libertine phase in their youth (“sowing one’s wild oats”), versus those who are simply like that by their very nature.  These are clearly two very different phenomena, and conflating the two will of course yield very specious inferences.  Rather than the total number of partners in one’s lifetime, it is probably better and more accurately to distinguish how long such a youthful libertine phase lasted: was it a few weeks, a few months, a few years, or longer still?

(Those armchair philosophers hawking those specious studies are clearly not presenting a worldwide view of the topic in any case:  they seem to have never heard of, or conveniently ignore, the Kreung people of Cambodia and their famous “love hut” tradition, for example.  Notice their surprisingly low divorce rates as well, by the way.  It’s almost like when young people, regardless of gender, are truly free to explore their sexuality without shame or punishment, they don’t seem to exhibit the sort of “parade of horribles” that occurs in sexually repressed societies, and also in the partially-liberated, partially-repressed societies like the USA and most of the Anglosphere today, still stuck in the “culture wars” of sexual politics.  But hey, the ever-insightful Dr. James W. Prescott could have told you that!)

          {Rasa says: I urge people to look up Dr. James W. Prescott & his Origins of Violence on the internet. He is another world to behold, a brilliant perspective from factual research.}

There is also reporting bias as well to these surveys, with Women tending to undercount their body counts and men tending to overcount theirs, for very obvious reasons.  And that is before we even begin delve into the definition of sex (what even really counts as “sex”?) being used as well:  there is clearly far more to sexuality than PIV penetration (though most studies take that as the gold standard).

“Residual confounding” includes confounding variables either not accounted/adjusted for or mismeasured.  Any number of these come to mind as well.  But the biggie that sticks out the most as being least likely to be accounted for in these studies is having a history of rape, sexual assault, and/or child abuse (sexual or otherwise).  I would thus hazard an educated guess that the traumas from such horrors, which we know now is a grossly underreported epidemic (nay, pandemic), would have at least some sort of adverse effect on one’s ability to pair-bond in the future, adversely affect one’s mental health, and would thus very likely skew the results of such studies at least somewhat.  And that confounding would have a larger effect on Women than it would on men, simply due to the far greater prevalence.

          {Rasa says: Let’s face it, Patriarchy doing most of the studies & observations will disregard their own abuses & concentrate on putting taboos on women, for any reasons whatsoever, however illogical they may be. There are few studies on how male abuse has affected people’s future lives. Few studies on what Dr. Prescott teaches: the pandemic of ATTACHMENT DISORDER, the disorder coming from LACK OF MOTHERHOOD – Motherhood being the nurturing, unconditional love women give. Why not much study of that? Almost everyone in our Patrirchal society has some form of attachment disorder because this kind of Love / nurturing is taken from us by Patriarchs.}

Leveraging from outliers refers to the fact that those at the extreme ends of the data range, or far outside most of the data range, would have an outsized influence on the statistical average, particularly if one uses the mean rather than the median as the average.

Oh, and the real kicker:  some of the studies that these naysayers like to cite are inconsistent in regards to whether there are even any significant gender differences at all in the effects of “body count”.

Thus, these specious studies are basically junk, and I will no longer dignify such garbage with a response going forward.  Consider it debunked, deboned, sliced, diced, julienned, and the remains having been completely laid waste for good.  You’re welcome.

One should also note that sapphics (i.e. lesbian and bisexual Women) never really seem to care or worry or whine about anyone’s “body count”. Gee, I wonder why? Perhaps that is because they are far, far less likely to objectify Women than men tend to do?  That is, they are far more likely to relate to other Women as “I and Thou“, not “I and It”.  Men can really learn a LOT from such Women indeed!

And finally, in a Matriarchal society, how would Women with a so-called “high body count” be regarded?  It would be generally…unremarkable overall, much like it would be for men as well.  Sex would be seen as a mutual act, not a “commodity” that men “take” from Women, nor something that builds men up by tearing Women down.  It would no longer be seen as a zero-sum game (win-lose), but rather a positive-sum game (win-win) overall.  And the very idea of forcing, coercing, deceiving, and/or manipulating anyone (regardless of gender) into any sex act that they don’t want to do for whatever reason would be seen as not only wrong, but also truly bizarre, perhaps even as unthinkable as cannibalism (hat tip to Jacklyn Friedman and Jessica Valenti for pointing out that general idea).

          {Rasa says: I look forward to the day, for women, when they control the family & the world. Men will be for the most part interchangeable. They can have sex with as many women as they want – women will not keep them chained to houses, cooking, cleaning, waiting for wifey to come home. They can be out doing hard work {put their size & mucles to good use} but not making decisions that affect humanity – political decisions, human rights decisions education & welfare decisions – the judicial justice system will be taken over by women – ending the laws & culture against them. Men can make decisions on their own businesses like let’s say construction, delivery systems, sanitation, restaurant chains. But if any of their businesses impact the ecology, land management & water, animal rights – all that will be overseen by women. They cannot log all the timber off a mountain or cut down the entire forest – women will allow only some of the timber to be taken, parts of old growth must always remain. Ditto women will supervise mining & minerals to make sure the land & water are not polluted. Women will also manage any type of nuclear plants – if any remain a thousand years from now. And religion – oh the importance of that – St. Paul & his nonsense will be illegal, lol. All the big religions wil be Priestesses, ministers, deacons, the entire nut will be cracked by women – & children, both male & female, can tend the altars but the message will be 180 degrees turned. {The male religions will shrink down to cults & the mainstream will laugh at the dodos who follow them.}

 Men can do what they like as long as it doesn’t hurt anyone – women will supervise that. Women will control most of the money. Men have gotten rich by robbing women with discrimination & unjust laws. It won’t be illegal for men to be rich, but it will be far more difficult for them to get that way when new laws are enforced & all the rights for women are in place.

          As far as families the paternity will not be crucial. If you want to know who Dad is, fine. If you don’t know doesn’t matter. The family money in most cases will be held by Mom – your future depends on her. Let him be a spare tire if he’s around.

          Pete here mentions sexual cohersion & crimes. This will dimish to almost nothing when women are in charge. Not zero – but 99% gone; women are not predators like men with their sacks of billions of sperms & the lack of ability to control their impulses. And men will have noting to do with children – will not be permitted alone with them, always under supervision or in groups where women are present. That’s a keystone of matriarchy – similar to the Bonobos where women are in groups, not facing one man in a nuclear family who will browbeat her, intimidate & exploit. No more free ride for men where they get to use up all the energy of women with drudgery – child care & house chores – while they fly high with their harems of secretaries, dental ‘assistants’, office back room shags, pole dancers & etc. The adult trade will change from women being featured to men. Women from offices going in groups or alone, having fun choosing which toy boys they want to have sex with. It won’t be sneaky or evil, doing it behind the back of the spouse because the marriage system will be different – monogamy will not be expected or enforced. Women will be FREE.}

And in such a protopian society, Women with a “high body count” would probably be, and be seen as, the ones who are the most prosocial and community-minded of all.  After all, the literal Latin meaning of the word “community” is “free sharing of gifts” (hat tip to Carol Brouillet for pointing that out, albeit in a very different context). And they certainly would NOT be vilified or shamed for it!

(And of course, most people would simply mind their own damn business in such a society, as they would clearly have far better things to do than judge each other’s sex lives like repressed busybodies.)

So what are we waiting for?  Kill Switch Engage!

Let the planetary healing begin!

        Wrote a letter to Randy Roach that ended up this article, lol – Yes I have a lot to say – Rasa Von Werder  To Randy,                            
        Yes I see.  Arnold tried to stand up to Weider way in the beginning – he said so in his first book ‘Education of a Body Builder’ – but Weider then pulled his ads, so Arnold lost that game. I guess Arnold learned to play ball – “Make love not war” when it came to Weider, just one of the many people in power he cooperated with to get ahead.

    I believe I have beaten Arnold at the game between him & me – it was a matter of time. It all played out, this is the end. And the end is I am justified & given the recognition I deserve no matter what he tried to do.

    “No lie lives forever”

    said Martin Luther King Jr. & this is proven but things need time to play out. There is a lot to this, it’s more than personal. These are smaller battles within the Gender War – this war is coming to an end on the planetary level & on the  personal level. There are two ideas that are pertinent to my work in body building – both on Wikipedia. One is ‘the Overton Window’ which is a measurement of ideas, cultural & so on, which are first unthinkable, then possible, then become accepted. That was my thrust or emergence on the scene – that is what I did for women.

    On the opposite side of this is the “Matilda” effect. It means that whatever women do {in this case it’s the scientific community,} their efforts, advances & discoveries are not attributed to them but to the men of power or status above them. This way women are forgotten, swept under the rug, not given credit personally or as a whole for their achievement.

    Why would this be? Because if individual women are given recognition it puts a good light on women in general, that is, all women benefit, all women are honored, their gender gets a boost. And this does not suit the opposite gender, who want to be the dominate one.

    And so women have been ROBBED, for a very long time, of the recognition due them, in fact, we’re talking thousands of years.

    But the big picture is we are on the cusp of the emergence of Matriarchy which will unseat Patriarchy, that is the Gender War, that is the big game we are playing.

    I did not see this in the beginning, I was influenced & inspired by a Power & Energy within which I did not understand or recognize. But it was the Ultimate, the Source of Life, that was pushing me ahead. It was time for women to break the shackles, the iron doors, & to emerge out of the dungeons & slavery men had confined them to.

    And that is what I faced after the fact – after I did my bit to get the modern competitive female body building started. I was challenged by two powerful men within the body building community who wanted to do whatever they could to stop me from getting recognition. Indeed, Arnold had personal reasons. Just like I had personal, emotional reasons for what I did. On the microcosm level it was both emotional for us. {I explain this in my life story – the early demoralization etc} But on the mega-cosmos level, these guys were on the Manside/Patriarchy dominating women & trying to keep this going, while the Woman-side was represented by me, a woman of God, sent by Her, to help establish Matriarchy again {when the world had peace, no wars.}

          I see the end of it now – it took time – in fact, FIFTY YEARS for me to be justified. But if I had NOT FOUGHT the battle, continued to fight against Weider/Arnold, they would have succeeded. Their cronies, sock puppets, Copellia dolls would have been recognized because they played the game their way, not women’s way. But I fought like an animal, a Honey Badger so to speak, {who’s little but stands up to Grizzlies & lions & wins!} to get proper recognition. And after fifty years, because of my patience, persistence & fortitude, faith & hope in God, at last, at last, if you Google me I will come up as the Progenitor – which even a short time ago was missing. It looked like Arnold/ Weider had buried me, but I rose up like the Phoenix when all seemed lost. Yes Arnold wanted to demoralize me, hurt me because he felt hurt by me. Weider wanted to help because he loved Arnold. The goons who were employed by both of them were stenographers to power, the yes men of the world who do as they are told, & they kept the anti-Kellie machine going. But THERE IS A GOD.

          I could mention some of the lost souls – really lost – who these guys destroyed. Mike Mentzer comes to mind. His entire world, & that of his brother were held in the hands of the IFBB. Without this monopoly there was nothing else. When he tried to stand up to them he lost – why? If you read his Wikipedia you find out that Mentzer was confused about God. He was partially right, in that God is Infinity. But his religion had no dimension of devotion, faith, hope, charity or any of the virtues we usually strive for – Mike seemed to think he was a power unto himself – He lived in his ego & flesh, so when that was buffered, he had no place to go – no ‘rock of Christ’ to hide inside.

          When the fragile ego is crushed & we have no alternative power we’re finished, & so Mike was. No longer in the magazines he became invisible. Efforts to rise up in other spheres didn’t work, & alcohol & drugs did the rest.

          It isn’t totally fair to compare myself with Mike because body building was all he had – for me only 20% of my career. And so Arnold/Weider depriving me from notice was not gigantic – but it was still a world I had a right to.

          I have now said a mouthful, especially regards the Gender War – the battle of men & women, the clash of Feminine, Masculine, who wins? And how did this enter into body building as I claim it has/did from the beginning.

          It is because of this perspective, that I’m not sure any one inside body building can represent me & write my story. Because, after all the men who are involved in body building admire the men! And they have their own identity meshed in with these heroes! They see with a lens that does not see women need freedom, women need love, women need to do what they want to do! Understandably they are looking from the side of men, & men want to be champs or Big Shots & although not all are tyrants & miscreants they would rather women be nice to them than defiant & independent. They generally will not struggle for the freedom/autonomy of women!

          And so, there might have to be an outsider who doesn’t give a hen’s tooth about body building to write an account of what I stood for & what I accomplished – this is a perspective not from the world of body building but the Gender War! What was accomplished when one woman appeared – a joke to some – flexing every mucle she could in Esquire – lifting weight & doing the same for Playboy later & underscoring this in many other venues? What did this mean?

          It was a threat to men & an invitation to women,

          “To the barbells, girls!”

          Playboy said.

          Women were scared, men were scared. Women had been scared of being ousted from society for breaking their rules. Men were scared women would beat them up, emotionally if not physically, when they got strong – Not scared of men any more. It all sounds so funny now, because it came about & women are in many ways beating men up. Look at the “Me too” movement, look at the education ‘crisis’ where men are falling behind, women forging ahead. Look at the Olympics, look at women wrestling on TV – women now in politics, running for president. Yes, women are beating men up & body building is one phase.

          What does professional drug-induced body building for women now prove?

          “Hey you guys – I can be just as freaky as you given testosterone. I can smell like you, get into rages,  get God-awful muscular, not your pussy footed beauty who strives to please. Any average man I can crush if he tries to assault or rape me.”

That has never happened before – men have been physically lording it over women thousands of years. But try raping Iris Kyle will you? Not a chance – Hand to hand she can break every bone in your body, lol. That gives men some pause.

The Gender War moves on.   {End}

8-23-25

Hi Rasa

I  could speak to the president of the Mr America competition and have you come as a special guest. I think you deserve the recognition and I am going to ask him to present you with an award, the first Ms America hall of fame. If you like, you can also be a guest speaker and talk about the evolution of women’s bodybuilding. I  could even interview you on a live stage.  The show is broadcast nationally so you would get huge exposure. 

Let me know what you think. 

It’s only 7 weeks away.

Best regards Carlos 

Total Recollection – Meeting Arnold Schwarzenegger

          OK it’s 2025 – this was 1972 – 53 years ago. I wish he would forget me. I wish he’d never thought about me after that fateful day but the wishes went on deaf ears…..

          I’m so excited! It’s my first fitness/beauty type contest. The Brooklyn Academy of Music and it was a big deal as not only did we have our contest but a men’s deal also with Franco Columbu & Arnold Schwarzenegger guest posers.

          I had a magazine with Franco on the cover – I would show it to him & ask for an autograph. Here I go. He’s sitting on a bench I walk behind him & present the tome. Did not even notice the guy to his left. The image someone snapped shows it to be Arnold looking at my cleavage in the beautiful one-piece bathing suit.

          Franco & I, not sure what we said. It seemed we were friendly.

          Next thing I know I’m standing somewhere around there & Arnold’s to my right. A photographer in front of us wants to snap a photo but Arnold makes a gesture not to.

          Then he says to me,

          “I vant to suck your nipples.”

          I sounded so funny, I felt like laughing. Of all the pick up lines I ever heard, this was a first. So I go along with the humor & say something like,

          “If you also suck my downstairs part.”

Next thing I know he gestures me to follow him. I am curious. Why do I do it? Wanting to find out if he’s serious or is it some kind of gag?

Well, he was serious. We walk past what seems like a couple football fields covered by dusty curtains here & there, dim lights. Now a wall greets me, I have my back to it & the Oak is in front of me dealing with one breast.

Now he parks on his knees, pulls aside my crotch & sticks his tongue into my twat. Yes, he’s serious.

The next thing is a huge black bodybuilder has discovered us – Arnold doesn’t see him as he has his back to the path. He goes away & within a minute or two he’s back but with Franco!

Talk about embarrassing! Arnold caught by the two men on his knees, his tongue up my yoni & Franco says,

“Kellie, I thought you were my girl?”

I stumble aside, now Arnold is getting up, & I quip – not knowing what else to say –

“I can be both your girl.”

Arnold bellows,

“No!”

And that’s it. We all go our merry way – Arnold & Franco do their guest posing – impressive, & they look exactly alike except Arnold is tall & Franco is short.

And I do my posing, receiving 2^nd place Miss Americana & Best Body – Arnold was a judge.

That’s about it. Then for the rest of our body building careers, I have had to pay for that sin – rejecting Arnold. I know things he did & suspect others, but to list all that am not eager to do right now – will be the next article.   {End}

Maria Shriver and Kellie Everts 1979

Maria Sriver – Kellie Everts – 1979

          Maria Shriver joined Arnold Schwarzenegger at the Warminster, Pa. fbb show, where she expected to see Kellie Everts. She said Arnold had said ‘Kellie will be here.” But she wasn’t, so Maria called Kellie in NYC and proposed a documentary. {Kellie wanted to compete in the show but her Dad died and she went all the way to Spain for the funeral. She was fasting & bore her perfect weight, but her grief prevailed. Her body did look immaculate at 132 lbs, however and you can see in Maria’s documentary how good she looked.}

This resulted in the nine minute saga of {1} Kellie praying in St. Malachy’s Church, W.49^th St, {2} training at Mid City Gym, 345 W 42^nd St

and {3} Preaching and Stripping at Harlow’s 242 E 79^th.  When she finished the piece at the gym, she literally had to run through the streets of New York in her red velvet bathrobe covering the skimpy suit to her next show at Harlows – no one took notice, ‘only in New York.’

          Maria loved the sermon as Kellie stated anyone who disrespected the Holy Virgin did not deserve Heaven – she nodded as Kellie glanced at her.

          They portrayed Kellie’s entire act, including the nudity – you could see her breasts swinging in the air –the details fuzzed out by camera.

          When Maria appeared to Kellie, she was ‘dressed down’ – no makeup, plain as can be. And when she said her boyfriend was a body builder Kellie asked which one. She said “his name is Arnold.”

          “Arnold Schwarzenegger?”

          Kellie asked in disbelief. She said yes. She had promised Maria an amusing anecdote re Arnold but when she saw her eyes like pools of love in the moonlight, she changed her mind. No need to hurt her, she made up some triviality.

          But Maria did not keep her promise to give Kellie a copy of the tape. She could not even see the show as it was local to Baltimore, Md. But when she worked at the 2 o’Clock Club she popped over to the station to ask for a copy. The manager, a cold young man, sat her down in his cubicle.

          He said sternly,

          “It is not our policy to give out copies of the show”

          He did say the show had the highest ratings that month.

          “Can’t you make an exception?”

          “Absolutely not”

         He then excused himself on some errand. Kellie sat there and pulled out her rosary and prayed. The Inner Voice told her,

          “Get up and walk.”

          She did so and a minute later came upon a cubicle where a young man sat with her picture on his desk in a frame!

          They exchanged greetings, he was warm as toast. Kellie asked him if he could make her a copy of her show. He said sure, & quickly did it.

          She took the precious tape and went back to the manager’s cubicle where he promptly returned and said,

          “You still here?”

          “I was just leaving,”

          and exited.

          Condensed version:

          In 1979 Maria Shriver, the future wife of Arnold Schwarzenegger produced a nine minute documentary on Kellie Everts, which featured her praying in a Church, training in a gym, and preaching/strip teasing at a Club. It was the most popular presentation of that month at the station in Baltimore, Md.

          Of Kellie’s many books there are three that cover her body building stint. They are:

          “The Man Whisperer”  {2024  page 110 with rare photos} – which gives a Time Table of all she did in the sport:

https://www.lulu.com/shop/pete-jackson-and-william-bond-and-rasa-von-werder/the-man-whisperer/paperback/product-v8j9q5k.html?page=1&pageSize=4

          “I Strip for God” part 9 – The Life in my Men  {2022 page 124}

          Documents the relationships of Kellie Everts which were Mr Universe, Mr Americas: Mickey Hargitay, Vern Weaver, Harold Poole, Franco Columbu, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Dennis Tinerino, Boyer Coe, Chris Dickerson and Reg Lewis

https://www.lulu.com/shop/rasa-von-werder/i-strip-for-god-part-9/paperback/product-m8572p.html?page=1&pageSize=4

          The Origin and Decline of Female Body Building  {2009}

Explains how the genre of female body, at that time did not exist, how it got started, flourished, and began to decline after the year 2000, when men got frightened by Kim Chizevsky and changed the rules. Then when Weider sold out to AMI IN 2003 it was relegated down to a subculture.

https://www.lulu.com/shop/kellie-everts/the-origin-decline-of-female-body-building/paperback/product-1v8555jy.html?page=1&pageSize=4