Revealing Dreams

(1) Dream says Splurge Once in a While – Go to a Restaurant – Feel Good About yourself – Stop Suffering, Sacrificing & Working Nonstop

(2) Next dream says prayers for people brought comfort to many

(3) Next dream says Souls in Purgatory miss the help when I fail to say the Holy Mass

10-20-25 Dreams of the last 10 days

          Was so busy last days could not write down several dreams – will do so now starting with one a couple days ago:

Rags or Riches?

          I am some place with a male looking upon me – not sure if he’s a Dad or husband figure, but he’s concerned with my welfare.

          I see myself or other women in 3 ways. He is on the sideline looking on. To the right there’s my sister dressed up in beautiful clothes, most notably the lace casual shoes I was looking at to buy. Her hair is nicely done & she is shopping for something – not sure what – maybe entering a restaurant for a lovely meal.

          To the left of me I see bags & bags of groceries, spread out in a row. Beyond that is a lady before a huge field, maybe a cottage beyond – Beautiful fields & trees – wide open vista beyond the trees shading the groceries – A bag to the left on top are cashew nuts. I take one & eat it & it’s delicious, but someone says,

          “That’s Mary Ellen’s food!”

          So I withdraw from that.

          Then I see my own fare, together with my husband I see a bag of dry noodles which has been crushed while still in the bag – there aren’t many left, very dry. I’m looking to gather things for our dinner. There isn’t much here. But then I see the bottom drawer of the bureau where I keep all kinds of beans – I notice the multi-beans – all colors – in particular & I exclaim to him,

          “We’ve got plenty of beans! We’ll be able to make a decent meal.”

          As he looks at me I see myself in my gray short robe, taking care of small kids. I’m weary from all my chores – tired – bedraggled – my hair stringy, sweat on my brow. I am worn out – a big difference between how I look & my beautiful sister. I had a thought, earlier in the dream – I wish I could go to a restaurant & have a filling, delicious meal.   {End}

          MEANING:

          *{I’m needing help with this, Pres. Nixon {he’s still with me, I asked him to stay.}

          President Richard Nixon: This is God telling you to let up on your sacrifices, go easy on yourself, go out once in a while & have a good meal. This doesn’t mean just physical pleasure but the joy of chatting with someone once in a while. You’re suffering too much, thinking of spiritual children – your physical appearance is how you feel inside. Whereas your SISTER – which is the practical, pragmatic self is who you could be once in a while. Dress up {like you do when you shop} – look beautiful & ease up on the constant pressure.

          When God told you long ago, “I want you to quit the celibacy, go out & have fun” still applies. You are ENLIGHTENED; you have had more than your share of suffering & it’s done its work – you have nothing more to prove or attain spiritually. The constant beating up on yourself ‘do this – do that’ takes its toll on you & I don’t like what I’m seeing {I’m the Dad or husband – a man who cares about you looking on.}

          The gray robe is your MIND: GRAY is brain matter. SWEAT is EXERTION. The KIDS are in your mind – creatures, persons, you care for. The SISTER is the other you as described. You do dress up whey you go out to SHOP. Try going out just to have a decent meal in a restaurant, the constant abstemious fare is not necessary – lol – symbolized by dry noodles & beans. I’m connected to you now, so I see & feel you.

          ME: While you’re here, Mr. President, tell me what you think about my breaking up with this former lady friend who’s been looking down on me all my life. What do you see as the benefits from my no longer speaking to her? – if any.

          PN: It isn’t just her you left behind; You divorced yourself from a lifelong series of abuses starting with your Mother & all that she brainwashed. This lady continued that Spirit to this very day, her work the continuance of your Mommy Fearest. So in fact you cut off that Spirit of HATE that your Mom projected & all those she influenced, a monumental split away from great evil.

          ME: Who is Mary Ellen & all her grocieries? The big horizon beyond, trees shading the groceries.

          PN: You’ve been thinking of having your groceries delivered. I’m saying NO. The cashews represents NUTS: It wouldn’t be good for your MIND, your well being. It’s better you go out once in a while, get our own materials.

          You’re wondering why – let’s not get into all that right now, you have other things to do.

          You’re asking about the lace shoes: they’re a symbol of marriage or some sort of UNION. This must be with God – that it’s approved by God you go out from time to time, feeling good about yourself. Your beautiful hair is good thoughts. Go out once in a while, splurge on pizza or even a cheeseburger like you did long ago – you allowed yourself 12 ‘anything goes’ days a year but you aren’t taking them. The next Holiday is Thanksgiving, but you can have treats once a month by your own permission, so go ahead & do it – you’ll feel better.)*

                             Effect of New Prayers

          Praying in a new way for particular things – for people who’re suffering from every thing imaginable & I name these things: Anxiety, depression, confusion, desolation, grief & mourning, loneliness, emptiness, despair, uncertainty, procrastination, fear, etc. And went into more than that – it went on a while.

          That night I have a dream & there are many bankets of all colors folded up & stacked against a high wall -the blankets go about 6’ up to this 10’ wall, & someone observing this says to me,

          “You comforted all those people.”   {End}

          MEANING:

*{Blankets are COMFORTERS & comforting.}*

                                      Man Wants Pizza

          I was too tired to say the holy Mass for two days in a row. A man appears to me, asking me to get him some pizza. He does this twice – coming back in my dream after a while.

          MEANING:

          *{Pizza is based on bread. He wants the Bl. Sacrament. He’s a Soul in Purgatory. They need help every day – they are suffering greatly, all alone, with hardly anyone ministering to them or helping. Unfortunately the world’s minds are on the world 24/7, morning to night.}*

10-15-25 Disturbing – a Woman Moves in

          I was with people – then I’m by myself in my apt when something shocking happens. A woman I’ve maybe met before – she has a guzillion friends – is suddenly here – moved in!

          I’m baffled how this came about. I’m trying to LIVE WITH IT, ADJUST, but wow, is it difficult. I keep asking,

          “How did you move in here, without permission?”

          What gave her the right?

          It seems she knew people I knew. I see a gaggle of friends. Some seem good, some kind of wild. I see a man with a swarthy skin like partying – many faces. She came from them.

          She & her friends heard I had an    EXQUISITE apt with lots of room & most of all, in a CONVENIENT location, right in the middle of a busy area with access to all that is good – a perfect place.

          She brought with her several ‘ballet barres’ – the kind on wheels that would usually be against the wall but you can wheel them out to the studio floor when needed. She has several of these, all loaded with reams of hanging clothes.

          I look around at my apt. All the couches – I have several – are covered with beautiful material. I see one with thin glossy cloth with soft light on it; I just sat down on it & made a crease. There are beautiful rugs on the floor. The place isn’t HUGE but it’s big, but big enough for two? I don’t even see a bedroom, I see two living rooms – not sure what else is here but I know there is, just don’t see it in my vision.

          I try to think how to give her & myself privacy. Do I put a drapery across the entire wall between the two living rooms & give her one for her living space?

          I see her face, it’s eager & open, like she’s very bold to just come in here without an invitation & somehow she expects me to accept her. I think maybe she can pay rent? Maybe that would help. I’m paying $650 a month here, but it’s worth double that. I could charge her the $650 & make a profit.

          But she tells me she hasn’t got a job! Then how could she pay? She’d owe me so much money for being here. And has so much stuff the clutter has destroyed the ambience & beauty of my apt, & the privacy.

          But I don’t know how to make her leave – what to do about this. I am baffled.

          I wake up & do exorcisms to make her leave, as if she really moved in – but I know it’s in my mind – so I want to remove her from my mind.

          Forgot another scene. In an extended part of this apt is a light-haired male that’s been loyal to me for years. He’s like a best friend or even fiancé, but we’ve never been physical or intimate or even that close – but he’s always been here.

          When he sees this woman here he gets his lady fried to help him move a certain bureau – a nice one – which he gave me. The two of them are dismantling it & will haul it away.

          I accuse him of being an ‘Indian giver.’ We talk & negotiate. I tell him what will I do now, go back to my best friend the lawyer?  As we stand there discussing it he might change his mind.

          MEANING:

          *{This is a very telling vision of how your mind would feel if you actually opened up yourself to a woman / women / & maybe their children, if you create the Order-Village.

          Their PRESENCE would clutter up your mind to the point of being unbearable!

          You would not EXPECT this but they would INVADE your mind & live RENT FREE. They would POSSESS or intrude upon you with myriads of problems / issues, & there’d be no peace, ambience or privacy. You wouldn’t be able to free yourself!

          The light-haired best friend could be PETE with HIS Guardian Angel giving you a MESSAGE or it could be two of your Guardian Angels explaining this would interfere with your writing & production of books. {You would go way back to the past when you COULD NOT – were UNABLE to write a book! – Your lawyer best friend tried to help you!} The bureau he’s taking back is where you keep your books! So he’s saying the intrusion of people entering your life would disturb your mind & kybosh your literacy.

          I can fully understand this because in the last 3 weeks or so I’ve only had DAYS needed to finish our latest book. But each day something comes up – just even one problem per day – that I’ve not been able to finish it. A writer needs LOTS OF TIME / PRIVACY, a clear mind, serenity, peace to write. That we all know – People who work with their minds have to have a room where no one enters or even a hut outside where they write in private. Isolation is needed to write – it consumes one’s entire mind & the mind must be FREE.

          This could be telling me to write the blueprint, but forget about actually RUNNING /OWNING such a place as this would stop my other work!  If I make the blueprint someone with the talent for the ACTIVE LIFE {at least during g that part of their life-I’ve been in both states myself} – not a contemplative or writer – could create & run it – an ADMINISTRATOR – which is not my cup of tea. I’ve had suspicions like this for a while, but thought I’d push on & make it work. This dream warns me on the side of how running an Order would affect me.   {End}

Matriarchal Musings 10-6-25

 Behold, Schrodinger’s Matriarchy

By Ajax the Great (Pete Jackson) – Comments from Rasa Von Werder

(Originally posted on the Vive La Difference! blog)

There has been a lot confusion over the years about whether Matriarchy is an “egalitarian” (equality-based) system or not, and the doublespeak from various academics (including those who claim to support it) certainly doesn’t help clarify things very well.  But here are three things to finally cut through this conundrum for good:  1) “philosophical razors”, 2) the “equality of what?” debate, and 3) a cat.  Yes, a cat!  A fuzzy kitty cat!  Here they are, in reverse order:

          Rasa says: Lol. Matriarchy WHERE? Whose Matriarchy? Mosuos? African’s? Some Tibetan villages where women have multiple husbands?* ps in their videos the women smile more than anywhere else I have seen* Rasa’s new Village/Order? Matriarchy does not exist apart from where it’s operating – like the places mentioned or most of the world as it is. You can describe it AS IT IS in various parts of the world.

          In my world, Order future Village, it will NOT be egalitarian. Men will have NO leadership roles. It is NOT some type of loose equality. Men are subordinates & that’s it – Don’t like it – leave. Go where you’ll be happy, go back to Patriarchy if it pleases you. But you will not be equals in Rasa’s world nor will you lead.

Schrodinger’s Cat is a thought experiment in quantum mechanics devised by physicist Erwin Schrodinger in 1935.  It is one in which a cat can be both alive and dead at the same time due to a particular interpretation of quantum mechanics.  Ergo, something that may seem like a contradiction on the surface may still be true nonetheless.

The age-old “equality of what?” debate, made most famous by Amartya Sen, is also instructive here.  Is it distributional equality?  Moral equality?  Equality of dignity?  Equality of opportunity?  Equality of outcome?  Equality of power?  Equality of position?  Equality of rights (and what kind)?  Equality of responsibilities (and what kind)?  Equality under the law (and in what context)?  Without clarifying this, the door is opened to the aforementioned doublespeak and confusion.  There are indeed multiple dimensions of equality.

          Rasa says: It might be easier for me to start with where men will NOT have equality: They will NOT determine our religious or spiritual beliefs, this is written out by Rasa Von Werder – nothing tyrannical, but a few items will have to be believed by all members IN GOOD STANDING, that is to say, you are NOT a Catholic if you don’t believe in Jesus as the leader. So in our Religion, you have to accept that women suld run the family & the world.

          Women decide ‘right & wrong’ as far as SIN, basically speaking – although the final judgement is without a doubt, up to God. God alone knows when we intend to commit a sin, when we are confused or ignorant or gone crazy – that would mitigate sin. But there are basics of what is sin to be explained by Rasa – nothing unusual – the same as the Golden Rule, the same as Christianity or yoga or Buddhism – but with a total matriarchal slant.

          Men will NOT determine the LAWS in our Village or how we judge a person guilty or not guilty by our own laws/rules. In the present world there is a terrible slant against women according to the viewpoint of men – this will not exist. Women are condemned, persecuted for sexual behavior. A woman judged a slut is given a much harsher reputation than a prudish librarian. We will not view women {or men} that way. Prostitutes will get as much of a fair hearing as the most supposedly saintly/celibate home bodies, lol.

And finally, here is a list of philosophical razors, which are “principles that “shave off” or eliminate unlikely explanations, helping to simplify reasoning and avoid unnecessary steps”, per Dr. Google and Wikipedia:

• Occam’s Razor: When faced with competing explanations for the same phenomenon, the simplest one is often the correct one. 
• Hitchens’s Razor: Any claim asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. 
• Hanlon’s Razor: Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. 
• Alder’s Razor: If an explanation requires more assumptions than another explanation for the same phenomenon, the explanation with fewer assumptions is preferred.
•  
• Rasa says: I was told by a lawyer friend ‘Never make assumptions. How we get TRIPPED UP by all our assumptions! We see things without evidence, just face value, which is frought with too many mistakes.
•  
• Hume’s Razor: Claims must be supported by evidence equal to their magnitude; for a large claim, large evidence is needed. 
• Sagan Standard: A variation on Hitchens’s Razor that states “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence”. 
• Popper’s Falsifiability Principle: A scientific hypothesis must be falsifiable, meaning it must be possible to prove it wrong. 
• Newton‘s Flaming Laser Sword: The principle that what can be asserted without evidence can also be destroyed without evidence. 
• Grice’s Razor: The principle that you should assume the speaker means what they say, avoiding over-interpretation. 
• Einstein’s Razor:  Make things as simple as possible, but not simpler.
• Hume’s Guillotine:  Or the “is-ought problem”, is the philosophical observation by David Hume that one cannot logically derive prescriptive “ought” statements (what should be) from purely descriptive “is” statements (what is the case) without an unstated or unjustified assumption. 

(There are several other such razors as well, see the complete list.)

Thus, the best answer that can be given, applying all three devices, is the following one, what I call “Schrodinger’s Matriarchy”:  Matriarchy is both egalitarian in one sense and not egalitarian in another sense at the same time.  Note that this is NOT like Orwell’s famous line from Animal Farm that “everyone is equal, but some are more equal than others”. Rather, this takes into account that there are multiple dimensions to the question of equality, and with Women in charge, the result will ultimately reflect Women’s preferences overall.  So what do Women generally prefer?  As a man, I cannot actually speak directly for Women of course, but from what is known from observation, they would generally prefer a free and as close to “classless society” as humanly possible.  And while there would likely still be some hierarchies (more of actualization rather than domination), they would not relish and revel in such hierarchies the way men do.  It would NOT be a game of “king of the hill” like patriarchy is.  While certainly Women would have more power than men overall, that is about the only thing that is certain in terms of equality or lack thereof.  The rest is ultimately up to them to decide in practice.  And they would know intuitively from observation that the way men have done things has been a terrible failed experiment that has backfired on men as well.  Likewise, attempting to keep the same paradigm but with the genders reversed, would backfire on Women, so they would ultimately follow a fundamentally different paradigm altogether if they had their way.

          Rasa says: What is a man? What is a woman? What is their nature? What is the difference in their natures? Look at it this way: A man is a SET OF BALLS. Those balls contain millions of sperm. His desire or nature is to plant those sperms like seeds in as many women as possible & produce as much progeny as he can. The Old Testament is replete with men going on & on about their prolific progeny – what they will leave behind.

 Now see the woman as a set of reproductive organs. She has the capacity to create a human being – which a male does not. What is her desire, vision or nature? – To nurture to protect, to raise up her child / children to become healthy, happy adults. That is what she wants, that is what she will strive for.  Patriarchy is based on males wanting to impregnate as many women as possible. For that they have to get women to agree & other men to step aside. That means some type of         POWER, DOMINANCE or AUTHORITY. It’s like the head of the herd, the strongest bull, that fights off the other males & gets his harem.

          In the human world if a man has lots of resources he can manage many women – & he also has to have the        FREEDOM to have multiple women which occurs with the DOUBLE STANDARD of sexual behavior.      .

          So there is the basis of Patriarchy: men fighting over women to be able to impregnate as many as possible. They make war with other men, they control women through religion, legalities & the armed forces of males – be it military or police. Their entire motivation is basically those balls wanting to release that sperm. Our present world is controlled by that desire.

          The way it is today, women are the prisoners of male culture & are beginning to win some battles fighting back. It’s going to be a long war. I predict hundreds of years, maybe a full thousand, beofre Matriarchy is universal..

As Gloria Steinem famously pointed out decades ago, men’s preferred shape of society is a pyramid, while for Women, it is more of a circle (or perhaps a set of concentric circles).  Men tend to think in terms of “who’s up and who’s down”, while Women tend to think in terms of “who’s in and who’s out”.  And I believe that would still be true under a future Matriarchy, where Women rule both the family and the world.

          Rasa says: I know a lot of people believe this – that women do not chose a hierarchal system. But I don’t see it any other way – to run a family you have to have it, to run the world you have to have hierarchy. A Mother makes decisions, she does not take a vote every time she makes one – although at times she might confer with the Moms,  Grandmothers, Aunts, sisters, female friends. But most of the time, she will manage children by herself without discussion. On larger questions there will be discussions & votes by the community – the elder women presiding. If it concerns the entire Village this would be the right thing to do.

Based on what is known from actual real-life Matriarchal societies, both historical and contemporary (and both human and otherwise too, from bonobos to lions and so on), the following concept is the most common denominator among them all, in a nutshell:

Women:  more power and more responsibility 

Men:  less power and less responsibility 

In stark contrast, under patriarchy, men largely have power without responsibility while Women largely have responsibility without power.  It really doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see just how dangerous and toxic that dynamic is!  And in “reverse patriarchy”, a purely hypothetical idea that has never had any proven precedent in reality but still lives rent-free in the minds of so many fearful and benighted men (and also some benighted women who act like “men in frocks” as well), it is just the reverse, and likely just as dangerous and toxic.  Whereas, in a genuine Matriarchy, power and responsibility nearly always go hand in hand proportionally to one another across the board.

          Rasa says: Power without responsibility – which men have. How do they use it? To exploit women. To steal kill & destroy. To collect huge amounts of money from the pubic – decide how to spend it with most of the money going into the pockets of men – some of it just stealing, some of it providing all the services to the public with companies owned by men.

          Women’s responsibility is to raise happy children – which is impossible with men abusing them so much, with men taking over all the agencies that serve children: religious agencies, medical agencie,s psychological agencies. It’s like women have to produce perfection while men cause injury to the children. Yes, injury. They don’t know how to care for children. They once killed thousands of orphans – doctors told care givers to isolate the kids, don’t touch the, except to diaper & feed them. All the kids in the orphanages died. They called it a disease of ‘marasmus’.

          {On this subject please also see the all-important studies of Dr. James W. Prescott “Body Pleasure & theOrigins of Violence” also published in my book “Breastfeeding is Lovemaking between Mother & Child” – Dr. Prescott also stresses the importance of ROCKING – which these evil men erased in the orphanages.}

They Could Not Live Without Love!

They could not live without the love

During the 19th century, more than half of all infants who were left in orphanages died during their first year of lifefrom a condition then called marasmus, a word derived from Greek, meaning consumption. This illness was also known as infantile weakness or atrophy.

As late as 1920´s, the death rate of infants of less than one year in various orphanages in the United States was almost 100%.In his 1915 report about children´s institutions from ten different cities, Doctor Henry Dwight Chapin, distinguished New York pediatrician, exposed the astonishing fact that in all institutions save one, every child under two years of age died.   

During the meeting held in Philadelphia, the American Society of Pediatrics, the panelists invited to discuss Dr Chapin´s findings confirmed his discovery as concordant with their own experiences.  Doctor R. Hamil pointed out, with dismal irony: «I had the honor to be connected with an institution here in this city of Philadelphia in which the mortality among infants under one year of age, when admitted to the institution and retained there for any length of time, was one hundred percent.” Doctor R. T. Southworth added: «I can give an instance of an institution from New York City that no longer exists in which, in account of the very considerable mortality among the infants admitted, it was customary to enter the condition of every infant in the admission card as hopeless. That covered all the subsequent happenings”. Finally, Dr J. H. M. Knox described a study done in Baltimore: of 200 infants admitted to various institutions, almost 90 percent died within the year. The 10% that survived, he stated, seemed to do so because they were taken out of the institution for some periods of time to be with foster parents or relatives.

After recognizing the emotional barrenness of institutions for children, Doctor Chapin introduced a new system: babies were to go to foster families instead of public institutions. However, it was Doctor Fritz Talbot from Boston who, after visiting Germany before World War I, imported the idea of “tenderness and caring”, not so much in words but in actual practice.

During his stay in Germany, Doctor Talbot visited the children´s clinic in Dusseldorf, where Doctor Arthur Schlossmann, director of the institution, gave him a tour if the pavilions. They were clean and orderly; however, what piqued Talbot´s curiosity was an obese old woman who was carrying a tiny baby perched on her hip. “Who is that?” he asked, and Dr Schlossmann replied: «Oh, her. It is Old Anna. When we have given a child all possible medical care and still he does not get better, we turn to Old Anna. She never fails.”

Sadly, North America was under the influence of Luther Emmett Holt Sr. – professor of pediatrics at the New York Policlinic and Columbia University, and his dogmatic teachings.

Holt was the author of a leaflet, The Core and Feeding of Children, published for the first time in 1849 and which was on its 15th edition by 1935.  During his prolonged reign, he became the highest authority on this topic – somewhat like Dr Spock in the 1960s.

In the leaflet, doctor Holt recommended the abolition of rocking cradles, not picking the baby up when it cried, feeding it by the clock and not spoiling it by too much handling  –even though breastfeeding was recommended, bottlefeeding was not discounted.  The very idea of tenderness and caring was considered un-scientific and therefore not even mentioned, although, as we said, the children´s clinic at Dusseldorf had begun to recognize its importance even as early as the first decade of the 20th century.

Studies to determine the cause of marasmus were not conducted until after the Second World War, after its high prevalence was discovered in infants of high-standing families, hospitals and institutions amongst babies that were receiving the “best” physical care. It became apparent that infants in the poorest of households, close to their mothers, could usually overcome physical disadvantages and thrive despite poor hygienic conditions. What high-class babies in their sterilized, scientific habitats were missing was maternal love. After this discovery in the second half of the 1920s, several pediatric hospitals introduced regular care by mothers in their pavilions. Doctor J Brennemann, who had worked in an institution with an extremely high mortality rate for infants, established a rule in his hospital whereas infants had to be held, walked in mother´s arms and offered her care several times a day.

At Bellevue hospital, New York, where this type of care became the norm, mortality of infants under one year went from 30-35 % to less than 10 % in 1938.

To thrive, it was discovered, an infant needs to be held, walked in someone´s arms, caressed, hugged, sung to,even if not being breastfed. It is this contact, the hugging, caressing, tender care that we want to point out. It is these basic calming experiences that help the infant survive and thrive. Even extreme sensorial deprivation of other senses, like lack of light or sound, can be overcome as long as sensory stimuli on the skin are provided.

They all died

Frederic II (1194-1250) Emperor of Germany, in his day referred to as stupormundi(«surprise of the world») – even though his enemies referred to him in more disparaging ways – wanted to discover what language children would naturally speak if they were brought up in silence. So he gathered infants and ordered their nursemaids to offer minimum care and not speak a word to the babies, as he wanted to determine if the children would spontaneously speak Hebrew, the older language, or Greek, Latin, Arab or maybe their parents´ tongue. It was a meaningless task, as all the infants died. They could not survive withoutthe caressing, the smiles, the words of their mothers or even their nursemaids.

In the words of Salimbene, 13th century historian: «They could not live without the caresses…» This observation is the first know comment about how essential touch and physical contact are for children’s development. With certainty, the importance of skin contact was known well before that.

Doctor Harry Bakwin, one of the first pediatricians to support maternal care for hospitalized children, wrote: «In the young child, tactile and kinesthetic sensations seem to be the most important. Infants will immediately calm when they are caressed and given warmth, while they cry in response to painful stimuli and cold.”  

Ashley Montagu
From his book   “Touching. The human significance of the Skin.” Avon – 3^rdrevised edition

https://archive.org/details/touchingthehuman000913mbp/page/n23

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

As the prophet Leland Mellott once succinctly predicted, “Women will manage everything.  Men will manage themselves”.  BINGO.

Perhaps mutuality is an altogether better concept than the vaguely-defined concepts of “equality” or (especially) “equity.”  It is clearly far more intuitively understood, more in line with what Women truly want, and certainly jibes much better with what the late, great Buckminster Fuller famously called the “feminine paradigm of leadership”.

Ditto for the timeless and fundamental concept of the dignity of the human person, which thoroughly transcends gender, race, creed, class, ability, and any other demographic differences as well.  And Women have historically been far better at recognizing and honoring such dignity, while men have been far more likely to honor it in the breach.

There are likely many such models, and many such paths to the realization of such models, of course.  But whatever way is chosen in any case, it is best for it to develop organically from the bottom up. Even though it is self-evident that, at the same time, we will clearly also need Women to occupy the highest levels of power, politically and otherwise, as well for a precondition to Matriarchy achieving full fruition, acting as Guardians of Liberty as well as placeholders of such positions to prevent men from taking over again, God willing.

Ajax comments:

I would also add: this article makes use of “four-valued logic”. Whereas, one is not limited to the strict true/false binary of “two-valued logic”, but there are also two other possibilities in addition, namely, that something can be both true and false at the same time, and that something can be neither true nor false.

Another good concept to add would be “suzerainty”. People often tend to think of sovereignty as a binary, but it need not be. Suzerainty is a sort of middle ground between sovereignty and non-sovereignty. One could say that under Matriarchy, Women would have sovereignty over *themselves* as individuals, and men would have sovereignty over *themselves* as individuals as well, but Women would additionally have suzerainty over men (and not the other way around).

Tuesday, 7 October 2025

What’s In A Word? On Suzerainty

By Ajax the Great (Pete Jackson) – Comments by Rasa Von Werer

(Originally posted on the Vive La Difference! blog)

In a recent article, “Behold, Schrodinger’s Matriarchy”, I had tackled the question of whether Matriarchy is in fact egalitarian or not.  The short answer could be summed up in the following three points:

1. Matriarchy is both egalitarian in one sense and not egalitarian in another sense at the same time.  (Hence, the nickname I gave it, “Schrodinger’s Matriarchy”)
2. Women would have more power and more responsibility, while men would have less power and less responsibility.
3. And such a paradigm of society would be mutually beneficial for both Women and men in both theory and practice.

But I had indeed forgotten that we also need a word that describes such a phenomenon well.  There are almost no words in the English language or any other modern language that really do it justice, save for one, albeit a rather obscure one at that.

Enter suzerainty.  Per Wikipedia, emphasis mine:

A suzerain (/ˈsuːzərən, -reɪn/, from Old French sus “above” + soverain “supreme, chief”) is a person, state or polity who has supremacy and dominant influence over the foreign policy and economic relations of another subordinate party or polity, but allows internal autonomy to that subordinate.  Where the subordinate polity is called a vassal, vassal state or tributary state, the dominant party is called the suzerain. The rights and obligations of a vassal are called vassalage, and the rights and obligations of a suzerain are called suzerainty.

Suzerainty differs from sovereignty in that the dominant power does not exercise centralized governance over the vassals, allowing tributary states to be technically self-ruling but enjoy only limited independence. Although the situation has existed in a number of historical empires, it is considered difficult to reconcile with 20th- or 21st-century concepts of international law, in which sovereignty is a binary concept, which either exists or does not. While a sovereign state can agree by treaty to become a protectorate of a stronger power, modern international law does not recognise any way of making this relationship compulsory on the weaker power. Suzerainty is a practical, de facto situation, rather than a legal, de jure one.

Current examples include Bhutan and India. India is responsible for military training, arms supplies, and the air defense of Bhutan.

While the word is typically used at the macro level, especially in the context of international relations, there is no reason why it cannot also be used at the micro level as well between people (of different genders, in this case).  “As above, so below, ” as the saying goes.

Note the very important nuance baked into the term.  (Sometimes the term “sphere of influence” is also used as an almost-synonym, although the latter is generally a weaker and less hierarchical term.)

People often tend to think of sovereignty as a strict binary, but it need not be.  Suzerainty is a sort of middle ground between full sovereignty and non-sovereignty.  One could say that under Matriarchy, Women would have sovereignty over themselves as individuals, and men would have sovereignty over themselves as individuals as well, but Women would additionally have suzerainty over men (and certainly NOT the other way around).  Men would thus be vassals relative to Women.

Or as the prophet Leland Mellott would put it:  “Women will manage everything.  Men will manage themselves”.  In other words, suzerainty.

So let’s spread the word, far and wide!  SUZERAINTY!

          Rasa says:  Ajax, you are obviously much more educated than I in certain areas – such as politics & world culture, so some of what you say goes over my head.

          I can only state what I know, believe to the extent I understand. Like ‘old Anna’ in the piece about ‘They can’t make it without love’ I understand what love is – I understand what caring is & I understand the damage men have done & how their criminal behavior has tainted the world, polluted it as badly as Chernobyl. Yes monsters are born due to the radiation / energy men have put out. Their crimes have lived on in the psyches of people – turning them into things they should not be. Abuse, neglect, cause self damage like drug addiction, depression, suicide & leads some to commit violence & homicide.

          This is not exactly what you’re talking about, but I’m not capable of responding on the level you speak – I haven’t studied that type of work. But I’m glad you’re introducing things from your POV, it’s new, it’s different – many people will learn from it & you present it in the most intelligent, concise, well thought out & written manner. So thanks for your major contributions to the cause of Matriarchy!

10-6-25 Life with President Richard Milhous Nixon

          Several days ago had this dream but too tired to record it:

          I’m some place in a building like a plain hotel & I am in the doorway of a room & there in front of me I see Pres. Richard Nixon walking forward with a man to his left. Delighted, I cry out something, not sure what, move toward him & offer my hand – which he does not take.

          *{He does not take my hand because we are communicating in spirit, not flesh.}*

          But he did say something, –

          “If you need me, call me.”

          He looks sick – like his head is sort of yellowy or darkish, smaller than normal, his neck is also thin & he is slightly stooped forward.

          MEANING:

          *{This is Pres Nixon long ago when they were persecuting him with the Watergate scandal. His appearance is how he felt – dejected, stooped forward, sick with grief. But you stretched out your hand to him – which means you offered to hep. He could not physically touch you but he appreciated your empathy & told you to call him when you needed him – that would be the future – & so it happened.

His head & neck: He has been HUMBLED so his head is SMALL rather than a ‘BIG HEAD’ which would be PRIDE. The darkish or yellowy is a sense of sorrow & fear. The neck being thin is he CAN’T HOLD HIS HEAD UP HIGH. He’s being demoralized.}*

          Days go by. Little did I know I’d be calling for his help. I reached a state of near collapse – exhaustion – & I did ask for his help which he gave.

          Had this dream {regards the near collapse}:

          There’s a man I rely on to drive a truck, regularly, down this steep road which is near me. The truck is huge – metal painted a vanilla color, has thingies in the front sort of like part of the truck, like carved out, but don’t know what they are. With this truck he delivers good things, like charity to help others, & he does this every day. He works for me I guess.

          But suddenly this road changes, could have been a disaster. The road turns into a ‘drop off’ like suddenly just goes down. I see behind the truck a large evergreen. The truck almost went over this precipice but it stopped, & it did not crash. If it had crashed all the goods inside it could have got damaged & the man driving could have been hurt or killed.

          When the truck stops I call to him,

          “Get out!”

          And he does so, trotting in my direction, to the right of me.

          MEANING:

          I recalled about 35 year ago Pres. Nixon suddenly appeared to me & helped me interpret my dreams every night! This went on for two or three months, and then he disappeared.

          I had no idea why he helped me but I attributed it to karma. But could not figure out what I did for him. When he ran against Kennedy I rooted for Kennedy {I was just a dumb kid besotted with Kennedy’s looks & charm} & wrote a speech in his favor. I did not vote for Nixon as I’ve never voted.

          Therefore, recalling how helpful he was to me with my dreams I asked him to interpret this one – which I found baffling – & he did. Here’s his analysis:

          *{President Nixon:  The large truck is your work for God – it includes all you do – the Holy Mass, the writings & the prayers. You work for God every day – you’re dependable. The truck is vanilla as that’s the color of milk – the milk of human kindness.

          The man driving the truck is you – your flesh. God works through you.

          Now came a day when you ALMOST CRASHED. The road suddenly went down in front of you – but you & your work were saved. You simply stopped & heeded to the God within who told you to ‘get out’ of working – stop working. So you did & rested.

Me: the evergreen behind the man & truck represents eternal life – which I work for.}*

          Now that the president was with me again, I quizzed him about a few things. First, why did he help me before & now?

          And he told me I had helped him when he was ‘down & out’ being persecuted – as the initial dream explains.

          He said I gave him Love/comfort & strength. And so, this karma made him reach me at a time I needed help {I can’t recall why except the dreams were much harder for me to understand long ago} & now, it’s obvious I was exhausted.

          He said souls reach out to souls by karma – the Almighty puts them together. God knows all, sees all & does all things. He said the way souls in Purgatory appear to me, souls on earth can appear to people in Heaven  needing help – if their karma permits it. And my karma permitted it, so he heped me.

          He said he’ll always be around if & when I need him.

          I did ask him about my health & he said – like all the others – my heart will improve & I’ll be able to do what I have to do for my God work.

          I asked him about the Royals – why God gave them to me to help – & his take was:

          “Holy Mary knew you were dependable, that you would do what was necessary & so you were the right person for the job.”

          I said there aren’t many ministers to Purgatory one can call on & he said,

          “They are as rare as hen’s teeth.”

          {Every Saint has their own way of explaining things. When I asked Saint Faustina about Mary giving me the Royals, – & including  Dodi Fayed – her answer was,

“You must be a very great Saint.”

That’s kind of embarrassing so I never mentioned it until now. I might add here that Sainthood did concern Faustina & Jesus told her she would be a Saint, & she asked him,

“To the altar?”

And He said yes.

“To the altar” means officially canonized.

I asked Pres Nixon about suffering – how much did he suffer? Have I suffered as much as he?

He said his sufferings at the end were about what family & society did to me most of my life. He’d gotten great respect & adulation for many years – then when they went to defame & impeach him it was a great blow.

He said I’ve never gotten the respect he once had – the attention / adulation I did get was because of my looks & sex appeal – it was lust – which can be dangerous. It’s nothing like the respect a president gets.

Dream of the black man chasing me aggressively & the extreme effort I put into escaping him  {black man regards spirit, not race, a spirit of darkness, not of God, could be of the earth or flesh, lower nture}

A dark skinned man was trying to do something to me but I didn’t want him. I was trying, with some friends to hide inside my house but it was impossible. He also had confederates helping him.

Finally I told my friends, better to escape the house & run into the wilderness – they can get us even if we go to the attic & lock ourselves in.

Then when he isn’t looking I run outside into the highway & find a convertible going by. It’s raining; a woman on top a leopard skin coat is lying there in water while the rain comes down. I jump into their car & ask them to drive me away.

But that dayum evil back man has found me out & has got a large back vehicle, which I see close ahead of me to the right & he continues to pursue me.

My escape has been taking great effort.

Finall there is a short lull in the chase. We are facing one another & there’s an audience. People are all around, I know he can’t hurt me in front of witnesses.

He takes out 3 images, the one in the middle is the smallest – it’s kind of brown tones with a brown frame. The others, one on each side, are both larger but I can’t see them too well.

It seems the chase had to do with this image in the middle, & the man says to me,

“I want to give you this image of you.”

And I say,

“But I don’t like that image of myself.”

He is CRUSHED, the wind taken out of his sails, & his face is now covered with all bumps – no space in between.

          MEANING:

          *{After some thought I realized this is the idea or concept of myself being recognized for the lower nature – not the higher things I represent.

And after this ‘chasing’ me relentlessly we finally come to a show down, & this idea says I should be known for my flesh {dancing, beauty, body building etc} I declare I DO NOT WANT THIS & then I stop it.

The BUMPS on his FACE are like SPEED BUMPS. These are there to STOP YOU from speeding. On his face are solid bumps – no space in between, so that would portray no movement at all. The thought is defeated.

The pictures being presented are various images of how I could appear, to the left & right of this middle one are other concepts – probably the more spiritual aspects of my identity, belief & accomplishments.}*

Another dream:

          There was a young, handsome delinquent, looking something like Douglas Fairbanks Jr, that I was following around. This place is like an outdoor mall, all kinds of spots. He’s constantly doing things that are wrong.

After a while I see myself with this lady who has on a ‘hoodie’ similar to the hoodie of an ancient painting of Holy Mary – hers is white & covers a lot of her face {“Virgin Mary in Prayer-Sassoferrato”}. This covers ALL her face & has so many layers, can’t even count – of cotton. You know how cotton wrinkles so in this wrinkled state layers upon layers make this hoodie very thick & it covers her face, both sides her head. You can’t see her face at all. And the color of it is medium blue – looks like someone dyed it at home, not store bought.

She & I now embark upon a walk in this mall. We come upon this delinquent boy who is now a performer & he’s on stage with a small band – I guess two other guys. He’s the vocalist.

Now they are doing a song & coming to the crescendo or climax of it & I do something with a ‘wand’ or ‘remote’ like you clic on it. Do I accidentally clic on it? Not sure, wasn’t aware, but I did clic & when I did it STOPS their performance as if the remote stopped the TV set & I hear them moan,

“Oh, we’ll have to start all over again!”

And that was just before they hit their crescendo, now must start from the beginning. I seem to be sort of apologizing, but this is vague.

It’s also like you were in a car & you clic the window & it automatically comes up – by itself – & I see it as if this window has closed on these guy – not all the way but like 5/8 or so – a few inches like 5 or 6 are still open.   {End}

MEANING:

*{This is my unfortunate relationship with the young man I was in love with – Nick – & how it came to an end.

          He’s the handsome, dashing delinquent – but his downfall was drug addiction, & he almost took me down with him. {After one year ‘going steady’ I got high blood pressure, another year & 3 heart attacks!}

          The ‘outdoor mall’ is the site downtown with all the bars that we jostled through.

          The two main scenes are the lady with the hoodie – myself – & the performance scene at the end.

          The person dreaming is my Mother God – she is in charge, leading me, she concludes this affair. The layers of cotton shrouding my face, dyed in blue, wrinkled, are the layers of pain & sadness this boy inflicted on me. Our relationship consisted of occasional trysts of love surrounded by umpteen cases of hurt from him to me.

          In the end I have so many layers of pain, that these cover my entire face – from top down to sides, all of it. This means what? I have no more ‘face.’ We say,

          He did this to save face,’

          Means a person did something to keep their PRIDE. Your face is who you are- your identity. You want to maintain it; you don’t want to lose all your respectability, sense of ‘self reality’.

          But by the time he got through with me, this shows I had nothing left – no pride, dignity or self respect. It’s all been consumed by sorrow & pain.

          And then what?

          I go see his performance & I CLIC without meaning to which ENDS his performance.

          This encapsulates when he CALLED ME BY PHONE to secure a meeting – I’d not gone downtown for a while – & he had someone to drive him to me {I’m 30 miles away} but I – my God Self – said NO.

          This NO represents the CLIC like when you hear a clic of someone putting down the phone or hanging up.

          But it wasn’t a TOTAL ‘clic’ or rejection. My God Self – now in charge – told him I was not obsessed with him any more but it could not be the way it was – {I knew I’d been addicted to him}. I still loved him & always would but I would not see him unless he left his druggie gf – partner in crime – & got clean in rehab. That is represented by the    WINDOW in the vehicle that closed but NOT all the way.

          And that was it. My God Self ended it – he could have complied but he didn’t – didn’t have the strength. And two months later he was dead of an overdose. ‘Starting over’ again probably means dying & being reincarnated. The dream does not explain if he did it on purpose. But I suspect he lost the will to live. He didn’t want to say it publicly – but I was the only woman he loved. The rest were either drugs or toys.   {End}