On prétend que, quelqu’un lui demandant ce qu'il avait fait pendant la Terreur, l\'ex-abbé Sieyès (1748-1836) se serait contenté de répondre :« J’ai vécu »

What did you do during the Terror? I lived.

Am I freaking you, animal?  Sex, you disgusting twisted deformed obscenity, I like sex and that’s my business, monkey, sicko, bag of filth.  What the fuck, one might say, business is it of yours what adults do in bed, nutter?  Just how the fuck do you get to enter people’s bedrooms and stick your oar into the proceedings?   Yes, I know no-one’s ever previously told you what a ridiculous sick fuck you are, but isn’t there just a first time for everything.  And you go through people’s wardrobes, too.  That a person may wear, that is forbidden.  Why has no-one laughed in your dirty animal face?  Self-important bumptious, self-righteous pile of infected shit.  Freak, nutter, something foul  and filthy and disgusting and sick and mad. Come on, how does your dull puerile animal brain have it figured that you have a right to punish women who have sexual intercourse with men to whom they are not married, come on, ape, savage, animal.  How the fuck does it get to be your business,

And you’ll be so distressed if you’re thwarted in trying to destroy me, as you would have been if anyone had hindered your crippling me.  Isn’t that awful?  Everyone go, Aaaah.  You cannot be distressed.  It is not permitted.  What is this, a fucking loony bin?  Well, of course that’s exactly what it is, worked that out some time ago.  I mean your avowed aim is attempted murder, but Linch and Naylor and Goldstone and all of them are united in upholding you, unanimous nothing may be done. They mustn’t be hurt.  They mustn’t be upset.  They mustn’t be made to live in the real world.  Everyone else must live in the world of filth and vermin , of violent sexually sick animals.  Or be destroyed, of course.

I walked into a bloody freak pit, totally divorced from mainstream England, fake academics, a bloody joke who dismiss all fact and reason and fall on their faces because some sick freak starts to jabber about ‘the Will of God’, ‘God’s Holy Word’. 

‘Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.’ Exodus.

Indeed killing witches is ‘God’s Holy Word’ but we have actually moved on from there.

Hey freaks, nutters, there are pagans in England, there are masses and masses of atheists, there are Buddhists, there are agnostics, there are millions and millions of people whose views are different to yours, there are millions and millions of women who aren’t dirty twisted freaks like you, aren’t hysterical about our bodies, who lie around in the sun with little or nothing on, who wear what we choose to wear, who make love to whomever we choose to make love, only in the world of a fucking psychopathic freak who belongs in fucking Broadmoor is there anything unusual about me, but nothing will do but that the freak, the sicko, the obscene diseased pervert be protected and upheld.
There are possibly as many as a million practising Catholics, a minority religion to which no-one who does not belong to it has to pay the remotest attention, like all the other minority religions with no right to force their views on others.

The thing is, all you filthy brutes, who the hell do you think you are to walk into my life, break my body and wreck my future, just who the fucking hell do you fiithy vermin think you are? Sick freak inadequates who need control of everyone else.

The purpose of isolating me, treating me as a leper, a non-person, is of course in part the ludicrous purpose of attempting to convince me I am a minority of one.  Absolutely no-one else is familiar with the classical pantheon or the works of Marx, Woodstock and the counter-culture simply didn't exist.  Etc.
 
April 9th, 2019
 
The number of non-religious people in Britain has jumped by 46%. Photo by Priscilla Du Preez.
The number of people in Britain who say they have no religion has increased by a staggering 46% over the past seven years, making non-religious people the fastest growing group in the country, according to new figures released by the Office of National Statistics (ONS).
The data from the ONS, taken from the Annual Population Survey, show the number of non-religious people has increased by nearly a half since 2011 to 39% of the population, with nearly 8 million more people now saying they have no religion. 
Humanists UK, the national charity working on behalf of non-religious people, welcomed the new findings and called on the Government to take heed of the latest figures by better representing non-religious people in government policies.
The results also showed a 15% decline in the number of people who say they are Christian (all denominations). People who said they were Muslim grew by 22%, Jewish 17% and Hindu 13%.
But Humanists UK also raised concerns about the leading question used in the survey which asked ‘What is your religion?’ It has been advocating for the Census question and other survey questions on religion and belief to change to ‘What is your religion, if any?’, as the existing question tends to overestimate religious belief, acting as a measure of weak cultural ties rather than religious belief. The British Social Attitudes Survey, which uses a two-part question, records 52% of British people have no religion.
Humanists UK Chief Executive Andrew Copson commented: ‘It is not surprising that the number of people who have no religion has increased by nearly a half over the past seven years. This is line with other evidence that shows more than 52% of British adults are non-religious.
https://humanism.org.uk/2019/04/09/number-of-non-religious-people-in-britain-jumps-by-46-new-figures-show/

Get it into your sick animal heads, freaks, people do not believe in this figment of your imagination you call ‘God’, get it into your mad ape heads it is an unproven and unprovable concept and you have no right whatever to mess other people around based on what sick filth you affect to believe to legitimize that by all normal standards you are sick filth, you are psychopathic, violent, sexist, diseased, delusional.


Oh, no-one can do anything, well I mean it’s God’s Holy Word that women should obey, it’s God’s Holy Word that women must be modest.

Fucking loony-bin and the whole of politics, the whole of the security services determined to turn the whole country into a fucking loony-bin. Does that stinking rat in Rome understand the simplest figures? A bunch of senile sex freaks who have lost control of Europe and will do anything to get it back. 

213 men, none young, 88 of whom come from outside the free world in the broadest sense, 93 of whom are over 80, supposed by freak sickos like Blair to have something pertinent to say about north-west Europe, which has disposed of them long since, in the C21st, the bastions of absolutely fascist religiously and sexually supremacist organization.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_living_cardinals

A rat-faced Argentinian who probably hates England anyway for political reasons, who has scarcely been in the free world pronouncing on an Englishwoman in England, where he has no authority whatever, deeming me unacceptable on the basis of his invincible fascism and misogyny and his equally invincible ignorance of C21st English society, other than as something to be destroyed.  Maybe the sick old perv actually believes no-one except me would sunbathe topless.  Try the Riviera, or how about Brighton Nudist Beach.  
 
Nutter freak animals, the lot of them.  The savages all grovel.  Lo, it is de Holy Farter.

…it’s because of thinking that Sweden, Denmark, the whole of your island, half of Germany groan under the terrible misery of no longer being subjects of the pope.
[…….c’est pour avoir pensé, que la Suède, le Danemark, toute votre île, la moitié de l’Allemagne, gémissent dans le malheur épouvantable de n’être plus sujets du pape]
LIBERTÉ DE PENSER
 
Reason brought them down, fact brought them down, thought brought them down.  They really don’t like these things at all.  We must all be good little hairless monkeys bound by the primate pecking orde.r

Wouldn’t it be awful if diddums started to cry.  Actually I suspect your slave-brute vermin are the more emotional, the brute Boden, would it have sobbed and began to throw itself around if anyone had intimated to it it had no rights over my mind or body, got hysterical at the notion a fat criminal butcher can be challenged, countered, questioned.  Perhaps it threatened suicide.  That’d be good.  Who needs fat criminal butchers?

Or maybe they’re all going to go on strike.  That’d be even better.  RCN calls national strike. Nurses furious at the idea there can be anyone better educated and more intelligent than they.  Nurses outraged at the suggestion they are not superior life-forms set on high to command whom all must blindly obey, every word that falls from their stupid animal mouths a jewel of wisdom and probity. Nurses livid they may not assault a woman who has had major spinal surgery.  Nurses hysterical and frothing at the mouth at the notion they may not jeer at the woman they have crippled for upholding democracy and objecting to having been crippled.  Nurses strike for the right to attempt mental and physical destruction, cos in their twisted animal invert world preventing them is fascism, it’s their religion, right, can’t stop no-one practising her religion. 

Indeed no-one can stop savages burning a witch at the stake.  Just throw yourselves around nurse-cunts.  Maybe you’ll seriously injure yourselves.  That’d be good.

Nurses outraged at being prevented from committing treason.  What else is it, the flagrant committing of crime after crime in order to further the destruction of democracy.  Go for it, animals, threaten to commit suicide if democracy is upheld.    `

And oh how doctors love them the stupid vicious ignorant ineducable malicious spite-ridden vindictive and absolutely criminal brutes they keep as pets, oh how precious they are, the sly, the squalid, the dishonest, the irrational, the bestial, rotten all the way through, nothing clean, upright honest in them, can’t do enough  for them sate their infinite malice, fall on their filthy faces before evil, because of course they are equally rotten to the core, truth to them is whatever an ape says it is, The Good is whatever a disgusting pervert animal says it is. 

All for the best, isn’t it, the destruction of democracy, fact, reason, morality dismissed out of hand, regarded as a joke, the rule of total intellectual and moral corruption.

All for the best a medically vulnerable woman treated as a punchbag for inadequate twisted animals.

All for the best everything an educated woman says dismissed out of hand because no-one need pay any attention to anything a woman says.

All for the best that a woman’s body is property to be broken at her owner’s whim and a woman’s mind is a joke.

The new normal.  Forget reason, forget civilization, forget the rule of law.  This is what they all want, what they have committed multiple crimes to uphold. The rule of the hysteria and psychosis of capering animals.

So the ‘Jew whore’ who is neither is just being left to die, aren’t I, thrown on the scrapheap, unacceptable for being intelligent, rational, educated, moral, honest, democratic, free, because the psychopath twisted sick filth of doctors cannot conceive people as important and powerful as they being treated like normal human beings, being questioned, being challenged.

I’ll survive. Not sure how, but I’ll survive to have a decent life because I am determined to, because I refuse to be destroyed by diseased vermin scum filth offal like Linch and Goldstone and Black and Whelan and O’Mahony and Ardeshna and Blair and Milburn, all of them, all totally avoidable, need never have happened, except these scum ape traitors are pure evil, pure vermin, rotten, rotten, rotten and vile and sickening and repulsive,  upholding and protecting other vermin.  A fucking tard boy capering slum-brute nursey made me do heavy manual work and all that was needed is someone transported the notes for me, as was the case with a colleague with a medical condition, but oh no the spite-ridden dirty filth vindictive tard cunt ape offal nursey-wursies, the IQ5 illiterate ignorant ineducable bloated delusional obscene cunt pig nurses couldn’t have that. 

Absolute cold deliberate evil, the insolent, insolent rejection out of hand of all the norms of free, democratic and civilized societies, all falling over themselves to go along with it, all dirty smelly traitors, shit-filled fascists whose sole criterion for the governance of human affairs is the ape with the biggest club. 

Nothing here not resolved instantly by:
Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech
Over himself, over his own body and mind, the individual is sovereign
Society has the right to require of every public agent an account of his administration

But these are all sickos, twisted, dirty, obscene, horrifying, sickos who think everyone is property, everyone is slave to the ape with the biggest club who sets an arbitrary ceiling on existence, a boundary to what is permitted with its ravings, sickos who think themselves too important to be questioned, psychopaths who think any criticism, challenge is a foul slur to be ruthlessly punished, disgusting dirty animals who crawl and grovel and suck cock, monsters who think they and their masters can do what they like with my body and my life, not doctors and nurses at all, any of them, freaks and sickos and animals who see nothing wrong in having crippled me. They’re not human, not in the real world, live in freak nutter world, impervious to all fact and reason.  They may even pretend to be concerned, wring their hands, but of course nothing can be done.  A crime has been committed, freaks.  It’s called causing grievous bodily harm.  But they don’t have a problem with that, they don’t recognize it as anything wrong, they’re deformed, depraved, degenerates, damaged.

And of course there is absolutely no point in wasting words on them.  They’re animal.  Or zombie.  Androids.  Programmed with a mad delusional and immovable version of the world.  I think I can get past that convulsion of revulsion in the pit of my stomach at the thought of them.  It’s all a sham.  They’re animals.  Language means nothing to them.  Reason means nothing to them.  Morality means nothing to them.  Slam them against a wall screaming what the fuck is the matter with you, animal?  That would not help.

You are in England you filthy evil insolent vermin.  You are not in some catlick slobbers over the smelly dirty wizened cocks of pervert animals shit-hole, you are in England.  Do you actually fucking understand that you are in England. 

I am not going to let myself be destroyed by that filthy foul fascist catlick slave-vermin monkey dirt filth savage Blair who lied his way to leadership of my grandfathers’ party  on behalf of sexually perverted twisted, fascist senile sickening old freaks who hate and fear freedom, hate and fear  democracy and hate and fear women, who lost control of society when they finally lost control of women and think murdering free women is a solution; at least it sates their malice.  Hey sick freaks, yes, I have skin, skin, freaks, savages, perverts, nipples, freak you, does it, perverts, sickos.  Yes, it is my body, my  body, my body to do with what I choose, not your toy to break to punish me for being a woman, sick filth vermin, not a punchbag for your sickness and inadequacy, you have no fucking rights over my body, you obscene senile perverted monkey, you  have no right to brutalize, assault, injure, cripple me.

But of course the slave vermin all think you do.  Look the dirty monkey scum council estate yob thug butcher boy Milburn fawning on the filth, the scum, the butchering vermin, indulgent were you, filth, got  to be understanding, boys having a bit of larf playing with a woman’s medically vulnerable body, all the filthy obscene vindictive narrow nursey women being indulgent, boys will be boys, just a bit of fun, what do I expect when I disobey, oo, look at ‘er, ‘oo does she fink she is.  You gotta do what Ners says, Ners gets eversa angry when you don’t do what Ners says, cos Ners is a fucking sick cunt who has never heard of democracy, never heard of accountability, never heard of transparency and refuses to fucking learn.   Jesus fucking Christ, why haven’t they all been thrown into bloody Broadmoor, the sly squalid malicious offal of traitors.
​
Hey freak sickos, make you all hot and wet does it, power over my body, nutters, obscenity,. get off on it, did you, the thought of my spinal fusion giving way, make you feeel so-o-o good to know you control my body for the rest of my life, oh you're so powerful and important, aren't you, subhuman vermin. Freak sicko Whelan, make you feel good, does it, baboon Linch, chimp Goldstone, oh well,  you've really proved you're  set above me, haven't you, turd scum.

What do the obscene old freaks dribble, one must be sensitive, one must be gentle, how convenient, being sensitive and gentle to vermin for 20 years while the vermin were free to break my body and wreck my life, no question of telling fucking vermin to be sensitive and gentle, and doubtless the ape savages like Linch will go on being sensitive and gentle for another 20 years or however long it takes to destroy me completely.  No excuse for any of them.  Absolutely obvious what was happening to my body, absolutely obvious the absence of democracy.  Simply what they all wanted and want.
​
Why has the dirty cunthead traitor Trot ape jabber-monkey Milburn not been prosecuted for refusing to uphold democracy, refusing to impose democracy?

Welcome to the world of the sick perverted evil monkey where you gotta do what you’re told, the only crimes recognized are disobeying a thug sicko and calling it a thug sicko, the world where everyone coos over thug sickos and says how precious they are and protects and upholds them. No opposing world is now acceptable.  If you refuse to live in the world of the disgusting diseased animal, you get beaten up and left for dead.  No-one will support you.  No-one will help you. 

Ignore their perverted fascist traitor ravings.  Oh no, no-one could do that.  Just fucking ignore sickos, thugs, butchers, the sexually diseased.  Oh no, no-one could do that.  Ignore psychopaths, nutters, freaks who think themselves too important to be questioned.  Oh no, no-one could do that.  Ignore insolent, insolent, insolent vermin of traitors.  Especially no-one could possibly do that
 
 Oh, have we crippled you, dear?  Oh, have we brought about irreparable damage to your body?  Well, you just stop being a little silly and making a fuss about it, you just go and play with your dolls, dear, because it really doesn't matter to anyone.  You're a woman, a feminist, a Marxist, an atheist, libertarian, a democrat, and we think you are a whore and a Jew.  You are literate, intelligent, rational. Worse if possible, you are capable of analysing complex ideas and of thinking for yourself.  You are everything we hate and fear and despise. You can't possibly expect to matter. Anyway, you're some kind of freak pretend-man.  Should have found a man to look after you.  Should have had children.  Back to the fucking Stone Age courtesy of Her Majesty's Government. 

"Women are ineligible to all civil and public offices, and therefore they cannot be judges, nor hold a magistracy, nor act as lawyers, judicial intercessors, or procurators." Public offices are those in which public authority is exercised; civil offices, those connected otherwise with municipal affairs. The reason given by canonists for this prohibition is not the levity, weakness, or fragility of the female sex, but the preservation of the modesty and dignity peculiar to woman. For the preservation of this same modesty many regulations have been made concerning female apparel. Thus, women may not use male attire, a prohibition already found in the Old Testament (Deuteronomy 22:15). The canons add, however, that the assumption of the dress of men would be excusable in a case of necessity (Can. Quoniam 1, qu. 7), which seems to apply tothe well-known case of Bl. Joan of Arc. Women must abstain from all ornament that is unbecoming in a moral
sense (Can. Qui viderit, 13, c. 42, qu. 5). Some of the ancient Fathers are very severe on the practice of using pigments for the face. St. Cyprian (De habitu virg.) says: "Not only virgins and widows, but married women also, should, I think, be admonished not to disfigure the work and creature of God by using a yellow colour or black powder or rough, nor corrupt the natural lineaments with any lotion whatsoever." It is not held,
however, to be a grave transgression when women ornament and paint themselves out of levity or vanity (St. Thomas, II-II:169:2), and if it is done with an upright intention and according to the custom of one's country or one's station in life, it is entirely unblameworthy (ibid., a. 1). Authors are even so benevolent as to say that if
the face is painted to hide some natural defect, it is entirely licit, owing to the words of St. Paul (1 Corinthians 12:12, 14): "And such as we think to be the less honourable members of the body, about these we put more abundant honour; and those that are our uncomely parts have more abundant comeliness. But our comely parts have no need." Canonists strictly condemn female clothing that does not cove r the person properly (Pignatelli, III, consult. 35), and Innocent XI issued an edict against this abuse in the city of Rome. )))))))))
Women in Canon Law, CAtholic Encyclopaedia, 1912

The second branch of the woman question, which of necessity follows directly after that of gaining a livelihood, is that of a suitable education. The Catholic Church places here no barriers that have not already been established by nature. Fénelon expresses this necessary limitation thus: "The learning of women like that of men must be limited to the study of those things which belong to their calling; The difference in their
activities must also give a different direction to their studies." The entrance of women as students in the universities, which has of late years spread in all countries, is to be judged according to these principles. Far from obstructing such a course in itself, Catholics encourage it. This has led in Germany to the founding of the "Hildegardisverein" for the aid of Catholic women students of higher branches of learning. Moreover,nature also shows here her undeniable regulating power. There is no need to fear the overcrowding of the academic professions by women.
In the medical calling, which next to te aching is the first to be considered in discussing the professions of women, there are at the present time in Germany about 100 women to 30,000 men. For the studious woman as for others who earn a livelihood the academic calling is only a temporary position. The  sexes can never be on an equality as regards studies pursued at a university.
Catholic Encyclopaedia: Women (1912)
To complement this article, which was taken from the 1912 Catholic Encyclopedia, New Advent recommends a prayerful reading of Pope John Paul II's 1988 apostolic letter, "Mulieris Dignitatem."
OK, I have read it. It's mostly about Mary and Genesis. It appears the Church has finally discovered women are also people, but nonetheless a different kind of people.
Therefore when we read in the biblical description the words addressed to the woman: "Your desire shall be
for your husband, and he shall rule over you" (Gen 3:16), we discover a break and a constant threat
precisely in regard to this "unity of the two" which corresponds to the dignity of the image and likeness of
God in both of them. But this threat is more serious for the woman, since domination takes the place of
"being a sincere gift" and therefore living "for" the other: "he shall rule over you". This "domination" indicates
the disturbance and loss of the stability of that fundamental equality which the man and the woman possess
in the "unity of the two": and this is especially to the disadvantage of the woman, whereas only the equality
resulting from their dignity as persons can give to their mutual relationship the character of an authentic
"communio personarum". While the violation of this equality, which is both a gift and a right deriving from
God the Creator, involves an element to the disadvantage of the woman, at the same time it also diminishes
the true dignity of the man. Here we touch upon an extremely sensitive point in the dimension of that "ethos"
which was originally inscribed by the Creator in the very creation of both of them in his own image and
likeness.
This statement in Genesis 3:16 is of great significance. It implies a reference to the mutual relationship of
man and woman in marriage. It refers to the desire born in the atmosphere of spousal love whereby the
woman's "sincere gift of self" is responded to and matched by a corresponding "gift" on the part of the
husband. Only on the basis of this principle can both of them, and in particular the woman, "discover
themselves" as a true "unity of the two" according to the dignity of the person. The matrimonial union
requires respect for and a perfecting of the true personal subjectivity of both of them. The woman cannot
become the "object" of "domination" and male "possession". But the words of the biblical text directly
concern original sin and its lasting consequences in man and woman. Burdened by hereditary sinfulness,
they bear within themselves the constant "inclination to sin", the tendency to go against the moral order
which corresponds to the rational nature and dignity of man and woman as persons. This tendency is
expressed in a threefold concupiscence, which Saint John defines as the lust of the eyes, the lust of the flesh
and the pride of life (cf. 1 Jn 2:16). The words of the Book of Genesis quoted previously (3: 16) show how
this threefold concupiscence, the "inclination to sin", will burden the mutual relationship of man and
woman....
Consequently, even the rightful opposition of women to what is expressed in the biblical words "He shall rule
over you" (Gen 3:16) must not under any condition lead to the "masculinization" of women. In the name of
liberation from male "domination", women must not appropriate to themselves male characteristics contrary
to their own feminine "originality". There is a well-founded fear that if they take this path, women will not
"reach fulfilment", but instead will deform and lose what constitutes their essential richness. It is indeed an
enormous richness. In the biblical description, the words of the first man at the sight of the woman who had
been created are words of admiration and enchantment, words which fill the whole history of man on earth.
The personal resources of femininity are certainly no less than the resources of masculinity: they are merely
different. Hence a woman, as well as a man, must understand her "fulfilment" as a person, her dignity and
vocation, on the basis of these resources, according to the richness of the femininity which she received on
the day of creation and which she inherits as an expression of the "image and likeness of God" that is
specifically hers...
14. Jesus enters into the concrete and historical situation of women, a situation which is weighed down by
the inheritance of sin. One of the ways in which this inheritance is expressed is habitual discrimination
against women in favour of men. This inheritance is rooted within women too. From this point of view the
episode of the woman "caught in adultery" (cf. Jn 8:3-11) is particularly eloquent. In the end Jesus says to
her: "Do not sin again", but first he evokes an awareness of sin in the men who accuse her in order to stone
her, thereby revealing his profound capacity to see human consciences and actions in their true light. Jesus
seems to say to the accusers: Is not this woman, for all her sin, above all a confirmation of your own
transgressions, of your "male" injustice, your misdeeds?
This truth is valid for the whole human race. The episode recorded in the Gospel of John is repeated in
countless similar situations in every period of history. A woman is left alone, exposed to public opinion with
"her sin", while behind "her" sin there lurks a man - a sinner, guilty "of the other's sin", indeed equally
responsible for it. And yet his sin escapes notice, it is passed over in silence: he does not appear to be
responsible for "the others's sin"! Sometimes, forgetting his own sin, he even makes himself the accuser, as
in the case described. How often, in a similar way, the woman pays for her own sin (maybe it is she, in some
cases, who is guilty of the "others's sin" - the sin of the man), but she alone pays and she pays all alone!
How often is she abandoned with her pregnancy, when the man, the child's father, is unwilling to accept
responsibility for it? And besides the many "unwed mothers" in our society, we also must consider all those
who, as a result of various pressures, even on the part of the guilty man, very often "get rid of" the child
before it is born. "They get rid of it": but at what price? Public opinion today tries in various ways to "abolish"
the evil of this sin. Normally a woman's conscience does not let her forget that she has taken the life of her
own child, for she cannot destroy that readiness to accept life which marks her "ethos" from the "beginning".
The attitude of Jesus in the episode described in John 8:3-11 is significant. This is one of the few instances
in which his power - the power of truth - is so clearly manifested with regard to human consciences. Jesus is
calm, collected and thoughtful. As in the conversation with the Pharisees (cf. Mt 19:3-9), is Jesus not aware
of being in contact with the mystery of the "beginning", when man was created male and female, and the
woman was entrusted to the man with her feminine distinctiveness, and with her potential for motherhood?
The man was also entrusted by the Creator to the woman - they were entrusted to each other as persons
made in the image and likeness of God himself. This entrusting is the test of love, spousal love. In order to
become "a sincere gift" to one another, each of them has to feel responsible for the gift. This test is meant for
both of them - man and woman - from the "beginning". After original sin, contrary forces are at work in man
and woman as a result of the threefold concupiscence, the "stimulus of sin". They act from deep within the
human being. Thus Jesus will say in the Sermon on the Mount: "Every one who looks at a woman lustfully
has already committed adultery with her in his heart" (Mt 5:28). These words, addressed directly to man,
show the fundamental truth of his responsibility vis-a-vis woman: her dignity, her motherhood, her vocation.
But indirectly these words concern the woman. Christ did everything possible to ensure that - in the context
of the customs and social relationships of that time - women would find in his teaching and actions their own
subjectivity and dignity. On the basis of the eternal "unity of the two", this dignity directly depends on woman
herself, as a subject responsible for herself, and at the same time it is "given as a task" to man. Christ
logically appeals to man's responsibility. In the present meditation on women's dignity and vocation, it is
necessary that we refer to the context which we find in the Gospel. The dignity and the vocation of women -
as well as those of men - find their eternal source in the heart of God. And in the temporal conditions of
human existence, they are closely connected with the "unity of the two". Consequently each man must look
within himself to see whether she who was entrusted to him as a sister in humanity, as a spouse, has not
become in his heart an object of adultery; to see whether she who, in different ways, is the cosubject of his
existence in the world, has not become for him an "object": an object of pleasure, of exploitation...
17. We must now focus our meditation on virginity and motherhood as two particular dimensions of the
fulfillment of the female personality. In the light of the Gospel, they acquire their full meaning and value in
Mary, who as a Virgin became the Mother of the Son of God. These two dimensions of the female vocation
were united in her in an exceptional manner, in such a way that one did not exclude the other but wonderfully
complemented it. The description of the Annunciation in the Gospel of Luke clearly shows that this seemed
impossible to the Virgin of Nazareth. When she hears the words: "You will conceive in your womb and bear a
son, and you shall call his name Jesus", she immediately asks: "How can this be, since I have no husband?"
(Lk 1: 31, 34). In the usual order of things motherhood is the result of mutual "knowledge" between a man
and woman in the marriage union. Mary, firm in her resolve to preserve her virginity, puts this question to the
divine messenger, and obtains from him the explanation: "The Holy Spirit will come upon you" - your
motherhood will not be the consequence of matrimonial "knowledge", but will be the work of the Holy Spirit;
the "power of the Most High" will "overshadow" the mystery of the Son's conception and birth; as the Son of
the Most High, he is given to you exclusively by God, in a manner known to God. Mary, therefore, maintained
her virginal "I have no husband" (cf. Lk 1: 34) and at the same time became a Mother. Virginity and
motherhood co-exist in her: they do not mutually exclude each other or place limits on each other. Indeed,
the person of the Mother of God helps everyone - especially women - to see how these two dimensions,
these two paths in the vocation of women as persons, explain and complete each other.
Motherhood
18 . In order to share in this "vision", we must once again seek a deeper understanding of the truth about the
human person recalled by the Second Vatican Council. The human being - both male and female - is the
only being in the world which God willed for its own sake. The human being is a person, a subject who
decides for himself. At the same time, man "cannot fully find himself except through a sincere gift of self".39
It has already been said that this description, indeed this definition of the person, corresponds to the
fundamental biblical truth about the creation of the human being - man and woman - in the image and
likeness of God. This is not a purely theoretical interpretation, nor an abstract definition, for it gives an
essential indication of what it means to be human, while emphasizing the value of the gift of self, the gift of
the person. In this vision of the person we also find the essence of that "ethos" which, together with the truth
of creation, will be fully developed by the books of Revelation, particularly the Gospels.
This truth about the person also opens up the path to a full understanding of women's motherhood.
Motherhood is the fruit of the marriage union of a man and woman, of that biblical "knowledge" which
corresponds to the "union of the two in one flesh" (cf. Gen 2:24). This brings about - on the woman's part - a
special "gift of self", as an expression of that spousal love whereby the two are united to each other so
closely that they become "one flesh". Biblical "knowledge" is achieved in accordance with the truth of the
person only when the mutual self-giving is not distorted either by the desire of the man to become the
"master" of his wife ("he shall rule over you") or by the woman remaining closed within her own instincts
("your desire shall be for your husband": Gen 3:16).
This mutual gift of the person in marriage opens to the gift of a new life, a new human being, who is also a
person in the likeness of his parents. Motherhood implies from the beginning a special openness to the new
person: and this is precisely the woman's "part". In this openness, in conceiving and giving birth to a child,
the woman "discovers herself through a sincere gift of self". The gift of interior readiness to accept the child
and bring it into the world is linked to the marriage union, which - as mentioned earlier - should constitute a
special moment in the mutual self-giving both by the woman and the man. According to the Bible, the
conception and birth of a new human being are accompanied by the following words of the woman: "I have
brought a man into being with the help of the Lord" (Gen 4:1).This exclamation of Eve, the "mother of all the
living" is repeated every time a new human being comes into the world. It expresses the woman's joy and
awareness that she is sharing in the great mystery of eternal generation. The spouses share in the creative
power of God!
The woman's motherhood in the period between the baby's conception and birth is a bio-physiological and
psychological process which is better understood in our days than in the past, and is the subject of many
detailed studies. Scientific analysis fully confirms that the very physical constitution of women is naturally
disposed to motherhood - conception, pregnancy and giving birth - which is a consequence of the marriage
union with the man. At the same time, this also corresponds to the psycho-physical structure of women.
What the different branches of science have to say on this subject is important and useful, provided that it is
not limited to an exclusively bio-physiological interpretation of women and of motherhood. Such a "restricted"
picture would go hand in hand with a materialistic concept of the human being and of the world. In such a
case, what is truly essential would unfortunately be lost. Motherhood as a human fact and phenomenon, is
fully explained on the basis of the truth about the person. Motherhood is linked to the personal structure of
the woman and to the personal dimension of the gift: "I have brought a man into being with the help of the
Lord" (Gen 4:1). The Creator grants the parents the gift of a child. On the woman's part, this fact is linked in a
special way to "a sincere gift of self". Mary's words at the Annunciation - "Let it be to me according to your
word" - signify the woman's readiness for the gift of self and her readiness to accept a new life.
The eternal mystery of generation, which is in God himself, the one and Triune God (cf. Eph 3:14-15), is
reflected in the woman's motherhood and in the man's fatherhood. Human parenthood is something shared
by both the man and the woman. Even if the woman, out of love for her husband, says: "I have given you a
child", her words also mean: "This is our child". Although both of them together are parents of their child, the
woman's motherhood constitutes a special "part" in this shared parenthood, and the most demanding part.
Parenthood - even though it belongs to both - is realized much more fully in the woman, especially in the
prenatal period. It is the woman who "pays" directly for this shared generation, which literally absorbs the
energies of her body and soul. It is therefore necessary that the man be fully aware that in their shared
parenthood he owes a special debt to the woman. No programme of "equal rights" between women and men
is valid unless it takes this fact fully into account.
Motherhood involves a special communion with the mystery of life, as it develops in the woman's womb. The
mother is filled with wonder at this mystery of life, and "understands" with unique intuition what is happening
inside her. In the light of the "beginning", the mother accepts and loves as a person the child she is carrying
in her womb. This unique contact with the new human being developing within her gives rise to an attitude
towards human beings - not only towards her own child, but every human being - which profoundly marks the
woman's personality. It is commonly thought that women are more capable than men of paying attention to
another person, and that motherhood develops this predisposition even more. The man - even with all his
sharing in parenthood - always remains "outside" the process of pregnancy and the baby's birth; in many
ways he has to learn his own "fatherhood" from the mother. One can say that this is part of the normal
human dimension of parenthood, including the stages that follow the birth of the baby, especially the initial
period. The child's upbringing, taken as a whole, should include the contribution of both parents: the maternal
and paternal contribution. In any event, the mother's contribution is decisive in laying the foundation for a
new human personality.
APOSTOLIC LETTER MULIERIS DIGNITATEM OF THE SUPREME PONTIFF JOHN PAUL II ON THE
DIGNITY AND VOCATION OF WOMEN ON THE OCCASION OF THE MARIAN YEAR

Since we can't all be Mary, our vocation is to be a mother or a virgin. Yep, that really speaks to C21st women. Sickly slime about my essential nature.  Obviously one is simply no-one is one has not experienced motherhood.

​My essential nature is human being.

Yeah, yeah, they've moved on.  Cherie Booth or Miriam can't remember her name - Mrs Nick Clegg  - Lady Clegg, I guess - no more mean the squirming morass of the Vatican has moved on than Benazir Bhutto meant Islam is second to none in upholding the rights of women.  I presume most of the old freaks in Vatican reside mentally in around 1912.  

If I just sum all this up.  I am a woman.  I cannot possibly matter.  Nothing I say can be of the remotest significance to men.  Nothing that has happened to me can be of the remotest significance to men.  I should expect to have been punished, crippled.  I should accept it.  What is fucking wrong with me?  What is the stupid cunt on about?  What's the matter with me?

I'm a human being in the free world in the C21st is what's the matter with me.  I have rights.  I live in a democracy.  

Well, someone should bloody hang.  I think it's probably Blair.  

As for you, you slimy wheedling, lying cowardly pervert freak piece of offal, am I evil because I 'flaunt' my body, does it disturb the pathetic old monkey, the dirty sordid twisted old baboon, must I cover myself.  I'm prepared to flaunt it, all right, unlovely object though it now is, flaunt in on television, flaunt it in court, show the world what you have done to me, animal.  Come again, MI5, the University, anyone, why do you pay five seconds' attention to a slimy ape, a sordid pervert monkey fascist traitor, a butcher who hates love and mind. Hey butcher-boy, aren't you proud of your handiwork, animal, what you exist to do, isn't deform and defile women, spread your sexual disease over women, I mean, it makes you so holy, doesn't it. 

You so badly want me to crawl, don't you, to whine and stammer I didn't mean it and beg your forgiveness if only someone will help me, but I'm not a filthy groveller like the rest of them, I'm not a filthy degenerate depraved animal begging to suck your dirty wizened cock, like the rest of them, a dirty animal who abandons all fact, reason and morality to please its master like the rest of them, a sordid filthy repulsive degenerate traitor like the rest of them,  devoid of principle, devoid of ethics, devoid of integrity, devoid of reason, devoid of honour like the rest of them,  a savage who whines I have offended against 'God's Holy Word' when what I have actually offended is a load of sick monkey-shit you attribute to ''God' to justify being a sick monkey, so tough fucking shit, animal, tough fucking shit.​ Can't live without being surrounded by lies and filthy grovellers who suck up your lies, can you, ape, can't survive in clean fresh air.  How desperately frantically you hate anything open, honest, upright, clean, how you pull strings and lie and manipulate and pay off to suppress all fact, all reason, all decency.  I own my body, monkey.  I own my mind, monkey.  You do not break my body.  You do not clear out my mind and tell me what I am permitted to think and say and write.  You are a piece of absolute trash, a smear of shit on the sole of my boot, monkey, a capering freak, a sick animal, and I am not damaged goods like the rest of them, creatures corrupted at source probably when they were tiny children, taught virtue lies in obedience, no matter what you are told to do or be, taught therefore of course to be criminal and bestial on command, which is exactly what they are, taught independent activity of heart and mind is the evil of self-will, is insolence, arrogance, it is evil to demand the right to hold one's own opinions not someone else's, virtue lies in being a creature of another's will, being and doing only what that other permits, truth is whatever they're told it is, virtue is whatever they're told it is and if they' were told brutalizing my medically vulnerable body is good, then good it had to be. Told I'm Jewish, Jewish I must be.  Whatever Authority dribbles must be true.  And of course when they in turn drivel it they get outraged at the suggestion they're lying.   Truth means nothing to them, fact means nothing to them. 

​To get a handle on how they therefore approach the practice of medicine, I think a fact, such as the result of a scan, is regarded simply as a tool, like someone who wanted to put up shelves might regard a hammer.  It has no intrinsic value as a small part of the bedrock of reality.  They have no concept of lies as an offence against reality, an attempt to corrupt reality.  Lies are again simply a convenient tool to achieve their ends.  Of course they have no concept of reality.  Reality is whatever is drivelled in their 'holy books', and since those are held to be true everything contrary to them is held to be false.  

And a very happy equinox to all my readers.  May you frot!  May you frisk!  Hoping you grok is too much of course, that being a mental process requiring a functioning mind.  
What you really need to solve all your problems is an Electric Monk.  An Electric Monk believes for you, so you don't have to worry about it or think about it (Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency).  You could try reading books but that of course would also hurt your non-existent mind.  Were you to consult the Marxist dictionary, you would of course find that words such as crawl, beg, plead, grovel, submit, accept are notable by their absence.   The word perjure probably not, but certainly absence from the Howard dictionary, like lie and conceal and corrupt.

It's just too funny and absurd and obscene.  You intone something like the witch must be destroyed and all these so-called great scientists fall over themselves to assist.  I suppose you believe in Adam and Eve too.  I do assure the House I was not created from Adam's rib.  I am a little quark, defo charm not strange.  Sure there's a rhyme there.  I am a little quark, sleeping in the park, I do wish you would hark, I do not give a fark.  Let us return to our leptons.  Whoops, sorry, forgot, anything written after about 1200 is 'unacceptable', 'forbidden'.  Oh I like leptons, I like leptons, I like leptons and I like to...leap. Yes, freaks, you have it one, what I really want to do is expose that it is forbidden, by unanimous agreement, a crime for which you can be destroyed, to prefer fermions to faith, let alone of course to point out that fermions trash faith.  I want everybody to know that about doctors, about nurses, the security services, about politicians.  All solemnly concur evil lies in residing mentally in the C21st.  Especially of course if one is female.  Girls aren't allowed to be capable of independent rational thought or to be familiar with physics.  That is men's work, just as is the question, the ultimate question of life the universe and everything to which madly only senile sexually sick ape men are supposed to be capable of giving an answer, which is not actually 42, it's the Electric Monk, as above.  Bunch of mad dribbling sick tards, the whole fucking lot of them. Girls are supposed to obey men and get on with embroidery, though nursing is considered suitable for that slimy construct the essential nature of woman and medicine if a girl is bright.  Demarcation, innit.  Keep off their turf, woman.   Yeah, right, only the great male mind is capable of fabricating an entire mental world based on the unproven and unprovable and then demanding everyone else accepts it as truth.

In particle physics, a lepton is an elementary particle of half-integer spin (spin ​1⁄2) that does not undergo strong interactions.[1] Two main classes of leptons exist, charged leptons (also known as the electron-like leptons), and neutral leptons (better known as neutrinos). Charged leptons can combine with other particles to form various composite particles such as atoms and positronium, while neutrinos rarely interact with anything, and are consequently rarely observed. The best known of all leptons is the electron. There are six types of leptons, known as flavours, grouped in three generations.[2] The first-generation leptons, also called electronic leptons, comprise the electron (
e−
) and the electron neutrino (
ν
e); the second are the muonic leptons, comprising the muon (
μ−
) and the muon neutrino (
ν
μ); and the third are the tauonic leptons, comprising the tau (
τ−
) and the tau neutrino (
ν
τ). Electrons have the least mass of all the charged leptons. The heavier muons and taus will rapidly change into electrons and neutrinos through a process of particle decay: the transformation from a higher mass state to a lower mass state. Thus electrons are stable and the most common charged lepton in the universe, whereas muons and taus can only be produced in high energy collisions (such as those involving cosmic rays and those carried out in particle accelerators). Leptons have various intrinsic properties, including electric charge, spin, and mass. Unlike quarks, however, leptons are not subject to the strong interaction, but they are subject to the other three fundamental interactions: gravitation, the weak interaction, and to electromagnetism, of which the latter is proportional to charge, and is thus zero for the electrically neutral neutrinos. For every lepton flavor, there is a corresponding type of antiparticle, known as an antilepton, that differs from the lepton only in that some of its properties have equal magnitude but opposite sign. According to certain theories, neutrinos may be their own antiparticle. It is not currently known whether this is the case. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lepton

There, now you have learned something, or would have were you capable of learning.      Do I fully understand it?  Not sure, but that's not the point.  The point is I think I should understand it, work away at it until I am sure I fully understand it, because it is important.  Your drivel, your primitive ape-shit, is not in the least important to me or millions and millions of other people.

Now read the following:
What is Life?  Schrodinger
The Quantum Universe: Everything that Can Happen Does Happen.  Cox and Forshaw
Why does e=mc2 Cox and Forshaw
Einstein for Dummies

How the fucking Christ do any of you dare force me into the world of mediaeval peasants?  I know the old savages, the pervert freaks in Rome and Riyadh, think we're all peasants and savages but anyone actually on this island knows bloody well we're not.  Just a bloody stinking savage, aren't you, Blair, some sort of slobbering primitive, lapping up a lot of hobgoblin drivel about a great head monkey in the sky who punishes disobedient women, a filthy sexist savage who buys totally into their world and dares to treat me like a naughty little girl who shouldn't bother her silly little head with men's affairs. Why didn't you tell the stupid old apes I'm a graduate of the University of London, therefore in the top 5%, and laugh in their stupid evil faces.

Love, Serafina Pekkala and friends​.  I can't once more upload the video of the current state of my body because the upload keeps sticking, but you can find it elsewhere on this site.    

Fun with fermions:
Extract from The Anile Heir ©2006.
 
I, Ysabel Jehan Howard, hereby assert and give notice of my right under s.77 of the Copyright, Design and Patents Act 1988 to be identified as the author of this book.

I think the core of this is action.   I don’t exactly see how.  They live life in the active voice.
What do you see when you see another human being?  Anyone, Sarat, Challin, me, well possibly that’s an exception! The squaddies who bollocksed you.  A stranger in the street. There’s something in the idea that we see something stationary and they see something in motion, though I don’t know what.  I suspect it has a lot to do with hierarchy deforming.  They see something the motion of which isn’t impeded by its place in the pecking-order. 
Sarat refuses to be dammed, two m’s, as a river is dammed, by the triviality of being Anile emperor.  It has no place, no meaning, in that other level of reality and the existence of modern human rights gives him, all of them a gloss, a place in the normal world. 
So my grand conclusion is that when we look at people we see them as they are in the normal world, which means we take in - accoutrements of position or lack of, even if we disapprove of at least some of them.  They see a person as he or she is at that other level, without any of the crap.  A being being in a field of flowers?  An active being in a field of flowers?
Do-be-do-be-do.  Can that be set to the tune of the anthem?
The problem is/was it’s not all the things the south said about us, that they are egalitarian and we are really hierarchical (though of course for some it is/has been), it’s that it’s so nearly the same.  But different.  That came out at Mel’s Place.  When there were still empty seats.  Carlin shocked Mel.  He had assumed how the good guys in Kadun do things is how they’re done in Dabida and Fidub, but that was at the level of Va the Silver Homeland or would you prefer a field of flowers. I suppose we call that the exoteric level.  I think we’ve returned the favour, assumed how Dabida and Fidub do things is how we do them, with modern human rights as distinct.  ‘Modern human rights’, give or take a head of sheep, are how Fidub has always done things.  Would that by any chance be at the esoteric level, that we have assumed a shared metaphysics?  Assumed we’re all talking about the same thing when we’re just not.
I know some of this is st-range! Not only have I probably not put it correctly, I’ve probably not put correctly exactly what I’m trying to think might be correctly putting it. Add to that that I know very little about metaphysics!  But Mel actually said it for all the world to see: To some irturbi at least the Fidubi belief-system was simply a particular kind of earth-power.   The whole history of recent years, all our confusions, all bound up in the relationship between earthpower and the Tradition.  When we’ve thought we were talking the same language we were talking different ones.  When we’ve thought we were talking different languages we were talking the same one. I just can’t work out what that relationship is.  Maybe a bulb, a plant-bulb, I mean, not a lightbulb!  Two separate shoots.  Or – like conjoined twins, you separate them and they die?  No, die can’t be exact.  Become something different?
 
May I show this to Challin, typed Ritawa, deleting of course the last paragraph.  Evil grin.
My fame spreads!  Of course.  He’s senoki, isn’t he.
He indeed is.
 
“Have you got five minutes sometime?” asked Ritawa.
“Of course.”
“There’s something I should like – I should be grateful if you would read.  I could mail it but I’d also like to be present when you read it.”
“Indeed?”
“Spetzi has been thinking about the relationship between earthpower and the Tradition.  No, more: its relevance to everything that has happened.”
“Ah,” said Challin.
“I realized I was invited to the party,” sighed Ritawa.  “Our conversations have taken an unusual bent.”
“After dinner, about 9?”
“I thank you.”
“I shall come and find you.”
 
Challin held out his hand for the phone.
And smiled.
And smiled more.
“You are a very fortunate young man.”
“I know,” said Ritawa.
“Are you aware of an incident at Carlin?  You are probably too young.  It must have been 15 years ago.”
“No…”
“Marula’s partner was a drunk.  There are no excuses.  On a visit to Carlin he tried to put out the Flame.  San-yaega-baht of course threw him out.  Shortly afterwards Marula threw him out.  It was probably the worst rift for 600 years. Publicly, at least.”
“Six – “
“Van-senok was livid that Zani would not take the Anile throne.”
“I have never entirely understood – “
“Nor I.  Nonetheless, he founded Dabida instead.”
“And so here we all are!  But why?  Why put out the Flame?”
“It burns,” said Challin.
“Burns wood?  That’s a bit – “
Challin was laughing softly.
“Primitive?  Oh it is, it is.  There is more to it than that. I too am no metaphysician – physicist?  Let us consider the natural world.  Are we not all tree-huggers?”
“Fire equally devastates a field of flowers?”
“And what is left?”
“I suppose ash!  I’m really very lost.  No, actually I’m totally drowned.  If Van-senok wanted Zani to crown himself emperor, surely Van-senok approved the Flame.”
“You have to think in metaphor.  These fields, suppose they are seared by fire, what then?  I believe some farmers do just that.”
“For a time nothing and then regrowth?”
“Make a senoki of you yet.  And what regrows is different, the constitution of the soil has been changed.  It is not Marula’s thinking, nor I think that of most senoki who consider these things, but there are branches – little more than twigs -  of earthpower where the Flame is perceived as a threat, an intrusion, a disturbance of the balance.  No, not  the green-haired brigade.  Kuran’s cronies, however.  The green hairs are at least superficially a far simpler proposition.  I should imagine Sarat’s views on the planet are identical to theirs.”
“Love at first sight.  But if that is not mainstream – “
“Why am I wasting your time with it?  Because it embodies the difference.  Union in earthpower means union with the physical world.  I do not know what that means, though there are of course others here who do. The Flame is an interloper from the non-physical world. You have considered talking to Cantilip?”
“No!”
“It would be somewhat indelicate,”  agreed Challin.
“What – oh no!”
“What Spetzi strives to establish is the relationship between fire and earth.  It is of course the practical.  It sent waves through Van-senok of many kinds.”
“Hostility?”
“On the whole no. An acute curiosity.”
“And union in the Tradition means union with the non-physical world. Oh I see!  I think.”  Challin waited.  “Provided one accept there actually is a non-physical world, these are the two halves of the Whole.”
“I have never doubted your considerable intelligence.”
“Having previously considered myself if not quite a cold hard man of steel  I find myself strangely ready to flush these days.  Then earthpower denies a non-physical world?  I may still be lost.”
“That,” said Challin, “is what it does, one goes through a door only to find another one.”
“Do I know you well enough to ask - ?”
“Frankly, no,” said Challin, “but this much I say: my  refusal to enter the maze was the root of my difference with Marula.”
“May I call that a refusal to join the party?”
“An invitation I am reconsidering.”
“We are all being changed.”
“Fire burns,” said Challin.  “What regrows is different.”
“Put like that, it is a little.”
“Frankly petrifying?”
“May I ask.”  Ritawa stopped, as one does when three questions at once occur to one and none of them makes sense.  “The last 600 years!  In your view.”
“An avoidance of the party?  Many social and economic factors of course.  The apparently independent development of human rights.  Must we not join the modern world, the party an inevitable if somewhat disruptive piece of baggage in the train. But then of course, as Spetzi identifies, the party was already here, cats at every base.  I do not think we should be here now had we not learned to swim in the shallows.  The less fortunate rescued from bottomless filth.  Perhaps above all why cats at every base.  Leaving us free to choose.  Tell Spetzi to remember that all she describes was atop a fundamental appreciation of cathood. Unless of course, as she says, there was no comprehension of the feline.”
         Ritawa was frowning.
         “That is perhaps the opposite of – “
         “What you have frequently heard me say?  No.  What was it, total democracy.  The party demands it.  You think older people could successfully have explained the party to you? Given that we fail to understand it ourselves.”
         “And the cats were – are – irtubi.  I am contemplating – too mild a word – another layer of what I understand is called my sexist conditioning!”
         “Oh yes,” said Challin.  “Perhaps unwise to think too hard.”
         “The cats in uniform had necessarily to be male.  The cats fighting with Sardun must therefore have been overwhelmingly female.”
         “I imagine our refusal to accept women was the cause of some irritation.”
         “Since we didn’t see them or saw them less.  The other matter.  Is it – would you say – an element of – we little tree-huggers in our field of flowers – no, that makes no sense!  If I may start again!  Anything from deny to shun the non-physical world.  But presumably Sardun must – embrace it.”
         “I understand Sardun harness the power of the physical world.  I have of course no idea how, though I understand the reasoning is that all life is part of the physical world.”
         “If there is a non-physical world.”
         “There is the question also of what in their terms is the non-physical world, which I have never remotely understood.  If the Flame represent light, is light not energy?  Non-material possibly a better term, but then – what is matter, never mind!  There are always more questions.”
         “Would you regard that as a warning or just guidance?” 
         Challin laughed.
         “Let us say intellectual curiosity can lead in unforeseen directions.”
 
         Challin pondered then dropped a line to Cioulis.  He’s really getting awfully good at doing good by stealth.  Several lines, in fact.  Very bright. Possibly a purely intellectual curiosity but not sure.  Possibly still a little shaken.  I know there is what in other circles would be called an aptitude test.  He would pass.  Would you meet him?
         Cioulis mailed back: Sure, but isn’t this PANTHER’s bag?
         I think not, replied Challin, and explained about Spetzi.
         Aren’t we sweet, aren’t we cute? Is it not wonderful to just be!  I see a slight embarrassment here.
         Of course
         Thank you!
        
         “Well, didn’t I just get the turkey,” remarked Cioulis to no-one in particular.
         Karmen looked up.
         “How so?”
         “The young guy who was so very entertaining, department Dabidan whore, Challin thinks he’s interested and thinks he’d jump the hurdles.”
         Saban said: “He is senoki?”
         “Segani.  So’s his partner.  It seems it struck her in a moment of illumination – we’re all bloody tree-huggers, just being in a field of flowers.”
         Saban truly does have a sense of humour.
         So of course does my beloved.  He arranged to meet Ritawa in ‘Opshar’s Glade. In the interim he digested the world according to Spetzi.
        
         Cioulis settled himself comfortably into the leaf mould, his back against a handy bush.  Ritawa squatted on a small fallen log.
         “Now,” said Cioulis, “where are we?”
         “A little late in the season perhaps,” growled Ritawa.  “A field of flowers?”
         “Aren’t we!” said Cioulis enthusiastically.  “Are we being or doing?”
         Waa!
         “I suppose if we were motionless, without speech.”
         “Without heartbeat,” added Cioulis.
         “Life is movement?  I have to see that.”
         “And non-life? The physical world?”
         “Glaciers?” suggested Ritawa.  “Rivers.”
         “Thus the Great Divide.”
         “Everything is in motion, just a slower pace…
         “Even corpses,” said Cioulis.  “A dead rat, does it stay fixed, like an exhibit in a natural history museum?”
         “You are telling me something about the Cult?”  Ritawa had gone rather rapidly back to Mel’s Place.  “Everything is in some sense dead.”
         “It’s a question of control,” said Cioulis.  “There isn’t any, so they try to make some.”
         “The final control to murder.” 
         “Movement versus inertia.”
         “Then there is no – being, no stillness?”
         “Everything is itself,” said Cioulis, “that is its being. Sarat.”
         “Sarat is being Sarat.”
         “The unique lovable individual he is.  He will not be the Anile emperor.  The Anile emperor is whatever Sarat is. So?”
         “Being is doing?” sighed Ritawa.  “You are – recruiting officer?”
         “Take your time,” said Cioulis.  “Just at the moment we’re not training.”
         “What does it entail?”
         “First there are – you could call them aptitude tests.  In the first half we completely screw your surrounding reality and see how well you hang onto it.  Look around, drink it all in, imprint it.  See that lissome frond.  You are in a clearing in a small copse in Carlin. Strictly not your mind, that’s way down.  You are Ritawa.  You have a  really rather bright partner called Spetzi.  For reasons that possibly just at the moment escape you you are in a clearing in a small copse in Carlin talking to a loon from Sardun, whose preferred attire appears to be pirate. Thus the earrings, which appear to be in the form of a knot.  You are sitting on a small log.  The sun is sinking slowly into the west, which is thataway. A squirrel is watching us from that tree, wondering if we’re tree-huggers.  You are sitting on a log.  The path out of the clearing lies over there.  It veers sharply left at its start.  You are sitting on a log, aren’t you. And the ground is firm beneath your feet.”
         “Then what?”
         “Sure?”
         “Yes.”
         No! yelled Ritawa’s mind. The pirate-craft rocked gently under him.  The sea stretched to the horizon.  The sun was in the wrong place. I am not even bloody well standing up! He found it is quite hard to rise from a sitting position when one is already standing.  Squirrel – detail.  The squirrel was a small fat puffin perched on one of the masts.  What does reason tell me!  I put one foot in front of the other.  I walk out of the clearing.  Into the sea.  Sharks milled below him.  You bastard!  Not sharks  not sharks what sharks. Vegetation?   Not bloody fucking there, not real not sharks. What should I like to be there?
         Cioulis grinned to himself. A trio of sharks rose out of the water, performed graceful porpoise spins and sank slowly below the waves.  Land appeared, apparently a rocky outcrop on which was a lighthouse.
         What! Swim. Land.  Raft.  You’re not even bloody porpoises, you’re a raft!  The sharks manfully resisted and remained sharks. Not sharks, wrong shape sharks.  Not going to be able to do this but I can try.  He walked into the sea and tried to clamber aboard a raft.  It was still a shark, but what the hell.
         Normality.
         “Excellent start,” said Cioulis.  “Not of course maximum intensity. What happened there?”
         “You tell me!”
         “Think back to your conversation with Sarat.”
         “What!  I – I was in two places and my mind told me with – nearly equal fervency both were real.  What did you mean – yes, one might have been more – not sure what the word is.  Fragile.  Thinner than the other.  But I wasn’t sure. A bit, maybe, coming in and out of focus?”
         “Ever used a graphics program?”
         “Sometimes.”
         “Reducing the transparency of a superimposed image.”
         “Yes, that’s the word.  Real reality isn’t transparent!”
         “And you chose the real one.  That is good.  But?”
         “It didn’t bloody well work.  Was I right the sharks were less transparent!”
         “Ah, no.  That was the survival instinct kicking in.  Every neuron in your subconscious mind is telling you not to commit suicide.  Every neuron is focused on one small part of the whole.  The ship doesn’t matter, even the sea. So what did you do next?”
         “I tried to turn it.  I mean I couldn’t but.”
         “Focus on the essential, that is good.”
         “But wasn’t my focus split?  Isn’t that a bad thing?”
         “You could not have jumped if you were not fundamentally sure none of it was real.  If you had turned it, some things are sometimes best done incrementally, to climb back to – claw one’s way back to – reality.  The raft become an island, the island land known to you, etc.”
         “That is startling.  I thought you said every neuron of my subconscious mind!”
         “Beneath that.”
         “Hmm. My conversation with Sarat?”
         “You mean he didn’t enter the dumbfuck game and turn it?”
         “Aargh may be my response.  You said there were two halves.”                                           
         “Evil grin. Worse.  I increasingly bring to bear the full weight of my forceful personality on you, giving you orders you resist with every cell, every atom of your being.  Gold stars for retaining a reasonably relaxed posture and telling me to go fuck myself.”
         “I really know how to draw attention to myself,” said Ritawa. “I am thinking there must have been people around Sarat.”
         “Never in a million years,” said Cioulis.  “1) There is a large number of progressively more searing hurdles.  We have to be sure.  2) That is precisely why we hate them.”
         “And it’s all the same party?”
         “Is a party not a varied place?”
         “Obviously you didn’t – mess with my mind.  I felt – all my wits about me, in full possession of my faculties.  What did you mess with?”
         “Pixels,” said Cioulis.  “I think one may call them pixels.”
         “I don’t understand.”
         “One to think about,” said Cioulis.
         “May I tell Spetzi?”
         “She might like to join too.”
 
It was then, typed Ritawa, I felt angry. At myself of course.  Having had my reality smashed fazed not your cold hard man of steel.  Much!  Why do I keep doing it!  Obviously I can rationalize.  Ingrained, not as a man but as a soldier.  Need to know. 
Spetzi took pity.  Poor darling, kiss better.  Etc.
 
After a while, Ritawa wrote.  We don’t just see with our eyes.  Locate ourselves, I mean. We only see with our eyes.  I was of course too thrown to think all that through.  Does the air smell of salt? Does my face sting?  Can I feel the log?  Should I have registered that subconsciously?
I think that might depend on the density of the pixels!  Suppose – not that I understand or anything.  An illusory reality put in front of your eyes.  You can’t not react.  As far as your field of vision stretches, you are on that bloody ship! Or suppose you were simply cocooned in an illusion, so everywhere you interface with the external world was cut off from it?
Hmm-hmm! What really puzzles me – did I just write that – Cioulis himself was nowhere to be seen.
Invisible man!
Not that too!
Time I went back to school.  The biology of vision.  I really want to know exactly how we see.
That would be brilliant.  Cornea, rods.  Remember bits but if you asked me to describe exactly how I am seeing the screen in front of me, I get about as far as light hits the eyes and signals are sent to the brain.
We don’t actually see with our eyes at all, do we.  They’re just the interface.  Obviously they’re critical, of all the awful things that can happen to people I’ve always thought being blind was worst.  But – technically, eyes are just a piece of machinery.  But – when all this is over, shall I write science fiction!  If a piece of machinery could be devised that registered, imaged, the external world and communicated it to the brain, then a blind person could see. Sight actually is all that matters, in the context of this.  So long as you could see the clearing it wouldn’t matter that you couldn’t feel it or smell it.
I’m wondering – this is weird.  So if I had simply shut my eyes, proceeded like some poor blind person by feel.  Maybe!  That depends on your cocoon. Isn’t it called a camera?  The machine!  Small matter of connecting it to the brain.
Doctors must have thought of this.  Have you ever heard of artificial eyes?
No.  That is hair-raising.  The surgery required to connect to the brain. 
I’m actually thinking  about what we’ve been saying, without turning a hair.  A illusory reality has been created.  What of?  Literally out of thin air?
There are about 90 naturally occurring elements, remember that bit!
That does somewhat simplify the whole thing!  So if you have all of them you can make anything that exists?  And presumably – what’s a rare metal?  Inessential to – most things I guess?
Actually not.  Vital to phones!
Why has Sarat not banned them entirely! But the natural world.  Presumably there are no rare metals in a fallen log.  The natural world is chemically fairly simple? What’s air made up of? Mostly oxygen?
Mostly nitrogen. 
What chemically is an image.  That seems to be the question.
Physically? I’m not saying there was a deck under my feet, only a good imitation?  A sensation, if we casually affirm we have dealt with vision.  What actually is a pixel?  Let me look….Oh great.  It is a ‘logical  - rather than a physical unit’.  That is clarifying! The ‘smallest addressable unit’.
O great pixel, impart to me your secrets. But that of course is in the context of a screen.  You can’t have a pixel in the open, all on its own. What I was starting by going to say is that in terms of sheer hair-raisingness – a surgeon is only human, his or her hand can slip, remember anyone can be wrong! Even if it were possible I’m really not sure a scalpel being wielded in my brain isn’t more hairy than this.  Except of course.
Except of course there would be a clear logical progression. 
There has to be, doesn’t there.
I’m wondering two things.  The first is – what you said about a different level of reality when looking at people.  Why just people?  Why not a blade of grass?  No idea what that means of course. Even if it’s true.  The second is – the Whole.  If everything is whole, it must follow that any part of it can be reached from any part of it.  No idea what that means, of course, even if true.  The third is saner and possibly madly more interesting.  We don’t just see what’s there like a camera.  Suppose you despise poor people or are terrified of dogs.  If you see a poor person or a dog, your brain adds a generous dollop of ‘your stuff’ to the image.  Doesn’t it.  I don’t just mean you have an emotional response.  Your brain edits the image.  So you only really see ragged clothes or dirt or teeth.
You don’t see a person and you don’t see the dog is really rather small! Were they big sharks?
ROTFL.
Tush, I was being serious…Imagine a shark the size of a goldfish.
Think that might be called a piranha. Well, smaller.  Not entirely sure that’s better.
All of this, all of it is about seeing. 
All of this is about what Sarat saw when he looked right back at me!  My life seems to have got quite exciting since then.  I couldn’t read what he was thinking.  I think now it might have been something like, OK, you want to play? I play.
 
And Spetzi wrote.
I kept thinking about those 94 it is actually elements.  Like a fully-stocked kitchen.  Only you can’t put them together any way you like because they won’t go -  but there must still be a mind-numbing number of combinations, with or without human aid.    So then I found a site for kids on chemical bonding and reminded myself – honestly, this girl was taught science! So then I wondered can something that doesn’t exist come into existence or is everything that can exist in existence.  Has life diverged as much as it can and if it can’t diverge more what stops it.  At which point I more or less decided that I needed a chat with Cioulis because the alternative was ten years at the Schools! But I remembered, when we were staying at Tamal-va, there was a mutant in a litter, a poor little two-headed puppy.  It was put down of course but it wasn’t viable, that’s the point.  Back to ten years at the Schools, no idea why, maybe because two brains. So then I started to think a couple of strange things, if an insect can manage on six legs, why shouldn’t a puppy if unfortunate enough. Why would it be unfortunate?  An insect is lighter. Wouldn’t a dog benefit from six legs to carry it?  Why shouldn’t a dog have two tails!  We have of course been asking ourselves for many years now why are things as they are and can they be different!  Not, however, on the cosmic scale.  Crazy questions, why isn’t a shark the size of a goldfish? How dare a panther be bigger than a house-cat!  They’re the same design, can’t be a basic design-flaw that stopped goldfish from growing!  Can a shark grow more? How fixed is reality, Ritawa?  There are giant things like planets and minute things like bacteria and it all seems immutable, but if it’s all made of the same stuff is it? Two things.
People have always imagined things that don’t exist, though whether they can’t is something else, from the five-headed monster to unicorns.  There is nothing beyond the capacity of the human mind to imagine, which is a commonplace enough idea except that in the current context it is just a little nerve-wracking. 
Fundamental particles.  I was actually quite good at physics but it wasn’t that kind of physics.  Back to the Grid.  Everything indeed is the same stuff. Jolly little tidbit with which to wow your friends: only 5% of the universe is actually visible.  Isn’t that completely mind-bending?  What it seems to mean is so far as we can calculate only 5% of what is calculated to be the mass of the entire universe is made up of normal matter that we can quantify.   Most of what I seem to be currently reading I feel as though I understand about one word in ten – yes, I can cope with ‘the’ and ‘a’ – but I do seem to be able to grasp the essential: the universe is out of this world!  It’s defined as literally everything, did you know that, not just everything that is, everything that ever was and everything that ever will be.
 
And Ritawa wrote:
I knew I had to do it and I knew he’d understand and somehow that made me feel worse, as though I was messing up the party again!  I asked if I could see Sarat briefly, at a time of his convenience of course.  I was asked to pop back at 3, so I popped.  I was shown in.  He was sitting on the desk on the phone, just ending a call.  Hi, he said.  Grab a coffee, do.  There’s a hot-plate and a mini-fridge.  I made polite noises about not wishing to take up his time but I grabbed a coffee anyway.  He motioned to me to sit and I sat, one of those frantically uncomfortable canvas folding-stools. He said: I hope Cioulis is treating you properly, I guess to show he was up to speed.   I grinned. I just wanted to ask a quick something, if I may. It – may sound a bit odd. What did you see when you looked at me? Ah. A person.  A person who actually isn’t a shit.  As to how to – progress. Pretty much the same, age, class.  Brought up differently. How differently? See how the budgie bites!
Does that answer - ?  I managed to say, I thank you.  Some of us, I admitted, are compiling phrase-books.  I don’t think I’ve met that one before.  He said: we’re all on a learning-curve.  My other question -  you are the Tradition.  Cioulis is earthpower. Cioulis said the  party is a varied place.  Does that mean I’d get different answers depending on whom I was talking to?  Woo-hoo.  Yes and no.  There’s only one reality.  They tell me it’s entirely mind-bending. For certain I’m not in its more esoteric reaches.  Upper branches, as you prefer.  I think Cioulis is capable of telling you reality is a tree.  I was made to learn a bit about it. Apparently it’s in the job description, essential qualification for the post.  I could not help laughing. What I wanted to learn about was how electricity is supplied to entire communities.  What unites the party is attachment to reality, seeing the real, what is there, not what you think is there, but – people are people.  They have their favourite bits of it.  They see it at different levels.  So – yes and no, essentially the same answers but they might seem different.  Does that help?  Very much, I said.  I thank you. And it’s based in physics.  Yes.
Of course I completely longed to say please may my partner be the first female member of the Imperial Army but of course that would be preposterous unless everyone’s female people not to mention children pitched up!  We are after all in this crazy nothing happening war.  A propos of which there was a very large map on the wall.  Can’t possibly tell you what I thought it was indicating but it was very, very interesting.
 
And Spetzi wrote:
Some of us female people have formed a kind of militia, just in case something disastrous happens, but I think we all understand that we don’t have a place in strategy planning, so it’s back to war to the death with leptons!  So no, I’m not doing anything particularly dramatic to assist the war-effort – though I may wish bloody Azt would bloody do something, preferably come out with their hands up, though probably not quite as much as all of you -  but I am very definitely working for the peace. 
 
 
Ritawa.  There’s only one reality but it’s constantly changing?  That actually sounds strange and is rather obvious..  A tree isn’t the same in spring as it is autumn. The geography of the planet isn’t what it was millions of years ago. What I think today most certainly isn’t what I thought a month ago! But the change is contained.  A tree is limited in its movement.  It can’t change itself into a daisy.  What limits the change is what it is. What limits change to people is what they think they are? Mental change I mean! And of course what other people think they are.
Spetzi.  Cantilip can’t have got that wrong.  I don’t mean she’s incapable of error.  In the situation, in the context, she could not have put on line total nonsense. Of course it might just have sounded different!).  People just getting on with their lives, not looking for a war. What have we learned?  The apparent difference is – let’s not say superficial, why not say superficial!  It works in the context it is, on level it is.  If there was no difference, it’d be the same.  Gold star, Spetzi, top of the class! There are different ways of climbing a tree but it’s still the same tree.  That’s pretty obvious too.  I mean you can start at that low branch on the left…What did you see when you looked at Sarat?
Ritawa.  That’s the funny bit, isn’t it. Pretty much word for word the same.  Only of course what you said.  So you’re His Imperial Majesty.  Let us see how this budgie bites!
Spetzi.  So what’s the difference?
Ritawa. Hierarchy, obviously.  We’ve been there.
Spetzi.  So he didn’t see a bloody offensive little shit of a junior officer, who bloody dares.  What does it mean?
Ritawa.  What do you mean?
Spetzi.  I don’t know!  But it means something, something to do with controlling, containing.  Don’t tell me that’s hierarchy too, I know it’s hierarchy too!  People are not to be controlled.  Of course there have to be ground rules for when they can be controlled, people being people. Let me try kindergarten steps. You wanted to establish how and in which circumstances he’d control you.  He didn’t see anything that basically needed controlling. Something in motion.  What did I say, hierarchy controls the motion.  A person can only behave in the way ordained by his or her position in the hierarchy.  Though of course there is only one way to behave.  Fun, this, isn’t it.    But we, but earthpower. In some fundamental sense sees people as being, not moving.  Not fluid.  It doesn’t  - wish you were here to soothe my brow.  You can put it really hierarchically or totally unhierarchically.  This is some filthy little man far below me.  This is a friend who’s really upset.  IS, Ritawa, IS.  Am I making the remotest sense?
Ritawa.  Yes but I don’t understand it either. We don’t think people are fixed.  Hierarchically or un.  If your friend is very upset you want her to be happy again. . 
Spetzi.  Oh no! I thought - what if Sarat were earthpower.
Ritawa.  So?
Spetzi.  Do you remember when I yelled at you for joining Challin and you said he wasn’t like what I thought.
Ritawa.  I told you other stuff too, didn’t I.  How none of us had ever met anyone like him before.  It wasn’t that he didn’t keep us on our toes, it was how he did it. 
Spetzi.  Never met a senoki senior officer?
Ritawa.  Now you come to mention it.  That’s interesting, isn’t it.
Spetzi.  I do of course keep every jewelled word that falls from your fingers.  Hang on a minute… ‘He just looks at you and that look says, oh this is ridiculous, but true.  I don’t mean the look says that, though I suppose it actually does. When I stop babbling, I mean the look says what are you? Munz describes it as biologist examining a new life-form.  He might say something like, ridiculous man. Then he’d ask you how you were ridiculous.  In a detached sort of way.  As though it were an open question rather than in a domineering way.’
Ritawa.  Of course we were all with him because we hated it all.  The last thing we wanted to be was ridiculous.  Does this sound familiar?
Spetzi.  Don’t tell me you expected Sarat to behave like Challin!
Ritawa.  Of course I didn’t. The problem just might be how very much he did.
Spetzi.  I suppose if you are a civilized being faced with a moron there can’t be that many variations on a theme.
Ritawa.  Thank you for your tender words.  It’s still what you said though, about motion.  I wish I could nail it.  Supposing Fana’s really upset.  Your focus is – what’s there. It’s not that the upsetness - is there such a word - is fixed, she can’t be happy again.  What IS is that she’s really unhappy. But – but if being is doing,  That IS – it’s the IS that’s fluid.  As if - this sounds good, no idea what it means.  As if the IS isn’t really an IS – this is going to drive me nuts -  means there’s a struggle.  Like that image going in and out of focus.  There’s something else there,
Spetzi.  That’s silly but I know what you mean.  About Fana I mean.  Seeeing the whole of her as her upsetness.
Ritawa.  You want to be a fuckwit.  Not of course you my angel!  There’s something there about choosing.  Earthpower doesn’t focus on the choosing but the choice?
Spetzi.  Could that possibly make sense? If there’s an illusory self, it’s pretty obvious where the struggle is.
Ritawa.  Then earthpower doesn’t believe in this illusory self?
Spetzi.  Earthpower says all of you is upset.
 
Cioulis had said: mail me any thoughts you might have if you like.  Quality check.  If it’s passable, I shan’t bother to reply, only if you go screamingly off in the wrong direction. 
 
“These two,” said Cioulis, “are nothing if not interesting.”
Karmen tapped his fingers on the table-top.
“I of course am more of a free agent.”
“She’s really going to relish some loon from Harn turning up on her doorstep.”
“I suspect little niss Spetzi would prove more than equal to the occasion.”     
“Just talk to her about fermions.”
“That is precisely my thinking.”
“I think not,” said Cioulis.  “He’d want to go and join her, not of course that he would and not of course that he doesn’t anyway – you know what I mean.”
“An activated wanting!  I know what you mean and I take that point.”
Cioulis was grinning to himself.
“What do you know about Challin?”
“A decent man, as clearly evinced. A brave one – “
“Nothing about his personal history?”
“Divorced, two kids with their mom, who does not seem to be anything of particular note.”
“Challin comes from deep VS, as I do, the area around the House.  Plenty of senoki in the Army of course but yes just possibly only one or few at least from the heartlands, the rest of us having joined Sardun.”
“So indeed he is unique?”
“You have to be pretty unique for Marula to fall in love with you.”
“I am entirely startled.  An affair – it would seem to me that you cannot be either Sardun or my lord of Van-senok if you will not go the whole way.”
“Ex-actly.  Joined up instead.”
“So long as Cantilip is not his daughter!”
“Dates are wrong,” said Cioulis.
“I am relieved to hear it.”
“Daddy is the fuckwit who tried to put out the Flame.”
“That did reach even our distant ears.  It would seem to me – that particular lady.  What is the vogue expression, socially conservative opinion.  My lady Van-senok perhaps the cause of a more conservative opinion of the female of the species?”
“No,” said Cioulis.  “Of course it may be our tendency to see what IS, block capitals.”
“You have lost me.”
“It isn’t that he thinks less of women. It’s that he thinks less of men.”
“You sound as if you know him – the same community?”
“Worse than that.  He had a run-in with the geralis.  Mate of mine was part of the rescue-party.”
“Oh, oh, oh,  I would guess it was after that he declared himself non grata – or grata, as you prefer.”
“He left it three months and planned it exquisitely.  That impressed us.”
“Indeed persons post do not necessarily think at their clearest.”
“What was of consuming interest to us is whom he talked to in those three months when we weren’t watching because we didn’t know there was anything to watch.”
“Cho?  You cannot believe in view of what you have said that it was a feint.”
“No, no, no.”  Cioulis looked quite shocked.  “Protected by a steel ring of fur, to mix my metaphors.  That took arranging.  It also means that PANTHER understood something essential, there had to be a focus for decent kids like young Ritawa who were nonetheless not quite ready to boogie naked in the Sa’aanda Senta.”
“They do that in Zur?  I must visit more often.  That is interesting,” said Karmen, and thought: you cannot be more than a year or two older.  But you of course have seen it and he has not.  I guess that is also what we are fighting for.
 
From Spetzi’s archive:
Spetzi: you have joined – I too can use the language of Harn – that sexist pig!
Ritawa: He’s not like that, Spetz. You’re probably thinking of someone like Ban-vardan, intellectually inferior, weak minds, all the rest of it. Yes, he has profound reservations about suitability.  They come from being bloody civilized.  He is.    

Fond also of a spot of otting.  

Have to say I miss the Thames.  The ottery has moved to the banks of the Adur, which appears to be the nearerst river. but it's still a fine warm book-lined holt