Exploring layers of trauma that have been transmitted socially, politically, spatially, and intergenerationally

Image for post

Tags: Abuse, Physical Assualt, Sexual Assault, Sexual Violence, Rape, Domestic Violence, Terrorism, Trauma

When I was growing up my father tried to encourage me to do things like eat the fat and grizzle off my steak because it “puts hair on your chest” my sister would obey. I never did. As far as females would go, who would want hair on their chest. But my sister would comply. She gobbled it up happily. They said it tasted like butter. He would also encourage aggression like a crowd would cheer for an opponent in a fight. Being who my father was, male aggression was admired and he encouraged it in us, but I was less aggressive than my sister. My sister would sup up the reward and admiration bestowed for it and after observing, experiencing, and then acting out aggressive behavior my family’s cultural ethos was slowly distilled. I was depressed in childhood, withdrawn, quiet. I retreated into myself. I now understand the phrase “abuse-related incapacity” because I had become self-withdrawn.

Now I am 52, soon to be 53, and I find myself in a toxic relationship with my twin sister, my mother, and my sister’s boyfriend. After allowing me to live here in my mother’s house with my 86-year-old mother, I was told that I have to take care of her. I have no income or spousal support. So, my sister had agreed to let us use the American Express card for groceries and necessities. But then I am made sick for using it! They are using electronic targeting against me for accepting their help. Yet, I’m still expected to care for my mother and attend to her needs while being abused with electromagnetic frequency. So, who is using this technology on us? Who is causing us pain? We are being watched and I don’t think my family is the only one involved in my stalking. They shoulder some of the blame, they shoulder some of the responsibility for the abuse that is perpetrated against me but there are other men out there that may be working with them. I don’t know?

Being in a relationship with my sister is like being in a funhouse where there are constantly shifting floors and walls. You never know where you stand because at any moment a wall can shift and you find yourself in another room. The rules change arbitrarily. I was told I had to act as a servant to my mother while periodically being abused by the three of them. I was told I could live here, take care of my mother, help her with breakfast, bathing and washing, cleaning and cooking, grocery shopping, and lawn care. And as a token of appreciation, I would get $5.00 a day for a little alcohol. Not a healthy habit, I know. Then someone started harming me with electromagnetic frequency and it forced me to cope using alcohol every day. If I could have drunk more, I would have and that is something that was a major change from my previous behavior. Of course, I would drink before all this started happening but it was never hard alcohol. It was maybe 3 to 4 beers of my favorite beer or 3 to 4 glasses of my favorite wine 3 times weekly. After studying psychoanalysis, I am in a better position to understand the mechanizations that have contributed to, not only my own pathology but to other family members’ pathology.

Then my sister and her boyfriend came to my house when my son was in the 9th grade and they took him out of the house because I couldn’t provide adequate space for him. They are abusive people but because they had wealth, a large home, fine cars they were perceived as being “upstanding citizens.” The kind of people the federal government would want to hire because they pay their bills, own homes, have cars, own credit lines, and pay their taxes. But wealth is not an indication of moral standing. Abusive people produce underachievers and instill a sense of defeat and failure because they DON’T ENCOURAGE, THEY DON’T SUPPORT, AND THEY CERTAINLY LACK ANY REAL CONCERN OR EMPATHY FOR ANOTHER’S WELL BEING. And although my sister and her boyfriend can help provide my son assistance, I feel he may not be in a safe place. Because she tells me all the time, “He’s just like you!” And I’m her little tool, her little plaything she gets to manipulate and exploit because she can. They tell people, “I’ll help you.” That’s what she told my mother and me and then, the floor and walls shifted, they get angry and act out against us because we are their “sycophants” for needing their help. They don’t know how or maybe don’t want to help people figure out a plan to be self-sufficient, they want you to be dependent on them, or on alcohol, so they can manipulate you. It’s the game psychopaths play.

I have been abused, sexually, physically, and emotionally and while this is all going on, they want to “fix” me while I am being abused. Is this not the very abuse that is perpetuating the previous abuses in the first place? I have been raped several times in my life and somehow it has just been perceived as “it’s what men sometimes do.” On this particular night, they were experimenting with electromagnetic frequency and sleep to sedate me. I know they were experimenting on me because I started to dream vividly. I fell asleep one night while my son was staying overnight at my sister’s and I woke up in the morning with vaginal soreness. I had not been drinking the night before because this was at a time, I didn’t drink every day. I was much thinner and younger then and one might say I represented as a symbol for “aesthetic sexual beauty.” I am certain I had been violated the night before but because I was unconscious, I don’t remember anything that happened. This has happened to me before with men I would date, but never in my own home. Women can be used as vehicles and/or “lent out” for sex and payment. I’m fairly certain this happened on one occasion with a particular guy I was living with at the time but what happened in my home that night? Was I “lent out” for payment?

There are a group of people at Shop-Rite. When I arrive in the store, at first, I don’t feel anything, but then five minutes after I arrive, I feel electromagnetic frequency turned on. Is it someone working at the store turning on the frequency or is someone following me? It also gets turned on when I sit down at my lap-top, and this I feel has something to do with what I have chosen to study; psychoanalysis, object relations theory, and abnormal psychology. I’ve noticed a direct correlation between the electromagnetic frequency I’ve been experiencing and my wireless router. The implants, I have two, that are located in my body seem to respond to electromagnetic fields; cellular broadcasting signals. These signals cast a signal and make me feel tired so I don’t want to move around. As a result, I lay down in bed and have become sedentary like my 86-year-old mother.

Google Earth not only records street and road information but also records the IP address of wireless routers. This is done so that when Google interacts with people, they can associate an IP address to a location. I’m fairly certain the implant in my lower abdomen acquires wireless signals but I don’t know how because you need a password to access services. The other implant in my head, I don’t know if it acquires wireless signals or if it is turned in to a certain frequency like a two-way radio that transmits audio.

Despotism creates an atmosphere for revolution. It is like John F. Kennedy said, “Those who make a peaceful revolution impossible make a violent revolution inevitable.” Through the repeated denial of rights, usurpations of power, and acts of dehumanization by those in power cause the manifestations of hate speech and the development of political ideologies that are the foundation of violent revolutions. There is a reason why a small number of battered women kill their abusers. It has happened at various times to despotic tyrants in human history.

I’m screaming at my family because that is what they do to me. They come into my home and act aggressively towards me like an abusive intimate partner. Issuing aggressive demands, “Give me $500.00.” When I say, “No. I can’t give you $500.00, I can give $300.00.” They respond with even more aggression, “No. I want $500.00.” If this goes on long enough it causes me to start acting like them through arousal and transference a screaming match ensues. It is as we have exactly witnessed with Donald Trump and his hate speech and rhetoric. It caused arousal and transference of the symbolic relationship and they acted with aggression as they moved into the Capitol building.

WRITTEN BYKaren Barna

Mother, Daughter, Gardener, Student, Graduate, Cook, Care-Giver, Lover of Books, Reader of Philosophy, Interested in Psychoanalysis

Some Notes on How Technology-Facilitated Violence Relates to the Use of Objects and the Transitional Object Phenomena in Object Relations Theory

Image for post

Tags: Electronic Targeting, Electronic Torture, Electronic Harassment, Targeted Individuals, Technology-Facilitated Violence, Crime, Abuse, Physical Assault, Object Relations, Stalking, Cyber Stalking, Cyber Misbehavior, Domestic Violence, Coercive Control, Online, 21st Century Technology, Terrorizing Intimate Partners, Violent Crime, Sextortion, Sexual Assault, Grooming Female Sex Roles

According to the following journal article, the person that keeps using electromagnetics against me needed something to suck on as an infant as a precursor to his/her transitional counter-phobic object phenomena. In the paper, The Precursors of Transitional Objects and Phenomena, Renata Gaddini states:

“Transitional objects and phenomena have precursors too. Precursors differ from transitional objects in that they are neither separate from the infant (e.g., the thumb) nor created by him (e.g., the dummy shoved into the infant’s mouth are coped with, in the early months, with these precursors. Autistic children are not able to cope thus; they do not suck. A possible biological, constitutional basis has recently been suggested by Frances Tustin for this inability: that it may be due to muscle floppiness and poor coordination.

Precursors of transitional objects are based on nipple-like sensations. They correspond to those which Tustin used to refer to as normal autistic objects and which she now indicates as autosensuous. Precursors to transitional objects are objects that have the capacity to console the child and have not been discovered or invented by the child. They are provided by the mother or are parts of the child’s or the mother’s body. Besides the tongue and the fingers, the forerunners of transitional objects include (1) the pacifier, (2) the bottle used as a pacifier (3) the child’s wrist (4) the mother’s wrist (5) the back of the child’s hand (6) the back of the mother’s hand and (7) the child’s hair, ears or naevi, which are touched or rubbed to produce a tactile sensation in association with the sucking or other combined actions.”

What’s interesting about the precursor to transitional objects is they have exclusive talismanic value typical of transitional objects. A talisman is any object ascribed with religious or magical powers intended to protect, heal, or even harm individuals for whom they are made. Talismans are often portable objects carried on someone in a variety of ways, but can also be installed permanently in architecture. If these “portable objects” can be permanently installed in architecture, then what prevents modern medicine from implanting these talismanic electronic tethers that respond to the electromagnetic frequency in the bodies of human beings. What’s interesting regarding the talismanic symbolism associated with these electronic tethers (the electronic device that sends electromagnetic signals to biologically implanted devices to torture and abuse) is that new and advancing technology is portable, it can provide protection as seen in the “Find My Device” and “On Star” feature in cell phones and modern automobiles, and they may even be capable of inflicting harm by hacking or casting electronic signals to transient Objects in the environment.

As is well known, transitional objects and phenomena are basically symbols of union, that is union after separation from the mother. In adolescence, the use of videogames with the use of remote controls can facilitate coping mechanisms in which the child can feel powerful utilizing Objects (e.g., machine guns and swords) as the extension of the self. Only gradually do they represent the baby or the mother and father. Because of the significance of symbolism regarding the union with the mother, a union that is represented because the mother exploits the precursory transitional objects as a way to “break free” from attentive caregiving by forcing these objects into the mouth of the infant (Winnicott, 1968). Also, these transitional objects can manifest as counter-phobic objects; fetishized objects used as religious amulets. Renata Gaddini states:

“It is the transitional object at a time when there is as yet no separateness and individuation because there has not been separation and loss and the origin of the potential space for creation. At times it is difficult to differentiate the precursor object from the transitional object in purely descriptive terms. We must be able to understand what each of them means to the infant.”

To understand what separation and individuation means, it is defined as the infant separating from the mother as he or she begins to understand his or her world through the realization that mother is separate from the infant. That is, the infant-self realizes the mother has wishes and a will of her own which are separate and independent of the child’s. The child is free to develop his own unique sense of identity. In most cases, separation and individuation phases occur in most adults. With regards to myself, in my particular case, separation and individuation has occurred. But it hasn’t occurred with the perpetrator using the electronic device that acts as the transitional counter-phobic object in its attacks against me as the “surrogate breast.” As the transitional counter-phobic object (e.g., electronic device casting the signals) the perpetrator uses to abuse the “surrogate breast”, this behavior is based on the paranoid-schizoid position of personality disorders. The same spectrum of disorders also includes autism. These two positions, paranoid-schizoid and autism, can be made relevant through the adult child’s lack of concern or empathy for the Object through its repetitive sadistic attacks. Because the child continues in its sadistic, primitive, and archaic attacks against the surrogate Object it represents a developmental failure in acquiring the capacity for concern and empathy.

People might say to me, “Oh, well it’s because you haven’t separated from your mother. You need to find your own place, free and clear of any dependent “status” on your maternal object.” First, I have been dedicating my time and attention to my 86-year-old mother because she is failing in her mobility. What’s more, many people do not understand this requires much more than just a “move away” from an Object towards independence. It requires legal interventions, explanations, and empirical evidence in which courts of law, mental health caregivers, and the general public can utilize as a resource in stopping this form of experimental coercive control and abuse. It requires restraining orders and lawsuits to make sure these types of abuses aren’t perpetrated on the general public at large. A benchmark standard with which federal and state law practices can adhere to definitions, terms, and penalties for such violations. These are all needed because it’s not just my physical safety that is in danger. The general public at large is in danger of receiving these same violations if legislation isn’t passed. Because I’m certainly not the one performing the sadistic, primitive attacks against my own body with regard to this electronic targeting and torture. Issues of personal safety are at risk for the general safety and security of the nation.

It is my opinion that the person using this electronic tether connected to my body suffers periodic psychotic breaks in reality in which he or she believes they are in their full right to torture, demean, dehumanize, through violent means if necessary, the sadistic behavior directed at me, the Object, which appears to threaten the perpetrator’s existence in some way. This is based on a delusional fantasy because the perpetrators of these attacks have no foundation on which to factually base any real claims of “threat” and the electronic tether acts or behaves like the original precursor to transitional objects found in object relations. It quells anxiety, gives the adult child a feeling of having a “super-power” and it provides the child with satisfaction as they have dominion and control over “mother’s vast resources”; love, nurture, attention, the endless supply of her breast milk, warmth and protection because they are now in control of the Object. With regard to the attention-seeking behavior of these electronic assaults, how else would the perpetrator keep his or her victim “speaking” about these phantasmagorical, seemingly absurd violations but to continually make sure the electromagnetic signals keep getting delivered to the Object body? Could have this perpetrator been ignored, left hungry, and cold by his or her maternal Object? And now threatened are they by the Object’s “move away” from his or her wishes? Here is where the “stand-in Object” fills the void and quells the anxiety, the hole left behind from an earlier neglectful mother? It is, after all, the “pacifier” or the “breast substitute” (e.g., the bottle filled with milk) that helps quell the anxiety of mother’s separation from the child, and this electronic tether can most certainly be perceived as the stand-in “pacifier” for the lost Object. It is in all likelihood the perpetrator may have suffered profound abuse and neglect at the hands of an abusive maternal Object in his or her early childhood development as this abuse is pathological. Abandoned and left ignored of his/her basic needs, he uses a transitional counter-phobic object, the electronic tether, to cope. I say this because I see it as a recapitulation of the same abuse received in childhood as its aim is to thwart the progress of a self-caring Object (e.g., thwarting physical exercise and bathing). Renata Gaddini further states:

“We find that the process of attachment to the transitional object (the symbolic representation of the reunion with the lost mother) takes place when the child feels deserted or lonely in the empty space and time between the developing self and the mother. Soon the transitional object will serve as a powerful protection against anxiety arising from the threat of separation and abandonment, anxiety which arises particularly in relation to the detachment from reality and the separation from the object, such as occurs when falling asleep.”

Gaddini, R. (2003). The Precursors of Transitional Objects and Phenomena. Psychoanalysis and History, 5(1), 53–61

Winnicott, D.W. (1968) From the unpublished correspondence with Renata Gaddini (cited in the above paper).

https://www.justice.gov/usao/resources/journal-of-federal-law-and-practice

WRITTEN BYKaren Barna

Mother, Daughter, Gardener, Student, Graduate, Cook, Care-Giver, Lover of Books, Reader of Philosophy, Interested in Psychoanalysis

Technologically-Facilitated Domestic Violence and Terrorism in Personal Civilian Life: Reviewing the psychoanalytic literature

Image for post

Tags: Violence, Electronic Targeting, Stalking, Cyber Stalking, Cyber Misbehavior, Domestic Violence, Coercive Control, Online, 21st Century Technology, Terrorizing Intimate Partners, Violent Crime, Sextortion, United States vs. Matusiewicz, 1st Cyber Stalking Case Resulting in Death

Research into the cause of violence suggests it begins as a breakdown of meaning in the advent of the irrational (Whitehead, 2007). In the irrational’s commission to do physical harm to the outgroup. Certainly, this is a fair description of what violence is, but what about the violence of speech, the peripheral phenomena outside of physical hitting and punching that aims to stripe a person of their unique identity through the process of dehumanization (Bevens & Loughnan, 2019). Hostility in the tone and voice towards another which demonstrates profound contempt or fear for the outgroup can begin with what may ultimately seem “benign” and to which some people perceive as acceptable “communication”. But oftentimes its culmination manifests into physical violence, bloodshed, and homicide. It is for this reason many individuals feel offended and violated when the cultural ethos of the group manifests as hate speech, derogatory slurs, and curses. These are received as boundary violations because the speech violates civil modes of decency U.S. citizens are expected to maintain toward one another. What’s worse is when the violence seeks to delegitimize the person’s feelingsopinions, and rights, which may make the person feel as if they are less deserving of civilized respect and love. This is part of the abuse found in the technology of coercive control in which the perpetrator makes the victim doubt what he or she already knows to be true. It’s called perspecticide and its one of the most devastating psychological effects of isolation in abuse-related incapacity. The confusion created by casting doubt into the victim’s mind that makes that person question what they already know or have experienced is part of the psychopath’s game at manipulation and control. Perspecticide is also called gaslighting.

In the area of moral exclusion and disengagement the moral dimensions of dehumanization in the context of sanctioned mass violence, focusing on the conditions under which normal moral restraints on violence are weakened. Hostility generates violence indirectly by dehumanizing victims so that no moral relationship with the victim inhibits the victimizer’s violent behavior. In this way, the perpetrator eludes the moral responsibility they are expected to maintain as part of the social contract and can further complete the violence. Dehumanization involves denying a person their unique “identity” — a perception of the person “as an individual, independent and distinguishable from others, capable of making choices” and “community” — a perception of the other as “part of an interconnected network of individuals who care for each other”. When people are divested of these agentic and communal aspects of humanness, they are deindividuated, lose the capacity to evoke compassion and moral emotions, and may be treated as means toward vicious ends (Haslam, 2006).

But what if violence is considered ennobling, redeeming, and necessary to the continuance of a learned lifestyle? In other words, the cultural ethos of some groups legitimizes acts of violence as a solution to settle disputes because these violent acts have been distilled in the minds of observers, victims, and perpetrators (Chodorow, 2012). One woman said, “I never considered my rape, actual rape.” This is because sexual coercion is something women sometimes expect from male suitors. The matters of legitimacy are not at all separate from the way violent acts themselves are considered violent in the first place. Subtle cues, hints of contempt and fear in a person speech and behavior, sideways glances, and the subtle usurpations of power through the process of dehumanization by those in power who, denying certain groups rights and privileges, deny characteristics that are uniquely human and characteristics that constitute the other person human. Those with the higher intelligence to know how to problem-solve via communication (higher language and speech), the networking of groups doesn’t resort to violence but pursue legislation through legitimate means like gathering signatures to petition the government for redress, they resort to their community to form campaigns of change that raise awareness about injustices so to promote change LEGALLY.

For Naomi Wolf, the beauty myth exists to “naturalize” a social construction that serves the interest of patriarchy: “it is the last, best belief system that keeps male dominance intact (Gottschall, 2008).”

Since one of the ways women are commonly dehumanized is through pornography, and the use of illustrations displaying princesses in fairytales with extreme beauty with small waistlines populate our storybook lore which allows for young girls to introject, at a very young age, a cultural beauty standard. Men place great value on female physical attractiveness because it is a trustworthy indicator of general overall health, wellness, and relative fertility (Gottschall, 2008). Some men use disfigurement of the female body so that male dominance is exerted and a woman’s power is stolen. Acts of castration such as acid in the face, slashing the facial features with a knife, cutting a woman’s tongue out, and the binding of feet to achieve some ideal of beauty as seen in Asian culture are historical facts. The new age of male dominance being exerted over females is being perpetrated through the use of technology. Technology-Facilitated Domestic and Family Violence in reports of women’s experience suggests that the profound dependency on smartphones, cameras, Internet-connected devices, computers, and platforms such as Facebook facilitates domestic abuse and family violence. The frequency and nature of abusive behaviors described by women who report the violence suggest this is a key form of abuse deserving more significant attention and study (also please refer to the paper by Taylor & Strutton, 2016). “Devices and software — smartphones, mobile applications perpetrators and their peers to escalate and amplify abuse. Conversely, technology can be used by survivors and their allies to attain empowerment, share and seek information and support, and challenge victim-blaming discourses (Douglas, Harris & Dragiewicz, 2019).” But empirical research on how technology-facilitates domestic and family violence is lacking. Media and practitioner accounts highlight how the use of advancing technology has manifested in domestic violence but there seems to be a lack of understanding on how it is used as a counter-phobic object in modern research. For example, the implantation of devices in the body that respond to electromagnetic frequency and utilizing global positioning applications to “find” someone’s smartphone location. Donald Winnicott wrote on the child’s need for the use of objects and relating through identifications, and the phenomenon of transitional objects in childhood (Winnicott, 1971). A more recent paper published by James W. Hull, M.D., illustrates how videogames fill the role of transitional phenomena in adolescent development (Hull, 2004). Hull states,

“There is a trend for increasing realism in the fantasy situations portrayed. This can include providing a completely enclosed environment for the player, such as one fighter plane game in which the player sits in an enclosed “cockpit” with the action displayed on a screen in front of him. Another example is “Dragon’s Lair,” a cartoon game in which the player guides a knight through a series of danger situations, using the controls to direct the knight’s movements and to operate his sword. Depending on the player’s decisions, the cartoon action unfolds along different lines.

Most players are males in the age range from mid-adolescence to the early twenties. In an informal survey, Harry (1983), found that males outnumber females three to one, and other studies have found similar sex ratios. In the study by Bibb et. al. most players were between the ages of 16 and 24.”

In the Queensland Study of Australia, domestic family violence has been defined as:

“acts of violence that occur between people who have, or have had, an intimate relationship. While there is no single definition, the central element of domestic violence is an ongoing pattern of behavior aimed at controlling a partner through fear, for example by using behavior which is violent and threatening…In most cases, the violent behavior is part of a range of tactics to exercise power and control over women and their children … Domestic violence includes physical, sexual, emotional and psychological abuse (Douglas, Harris & Dragiewicz, 2019).”

For example, it has been claimed that “violence in the family should be understood primarily as coercive control.” Abusers utilize physical, sexual, emotional, and financial abuse and threats to dominate women partners, facilitating patterns of coercive control. The paper, Technology-Facilitated Domestic and Family Violence: Women’s Experiences draws on the work of Evan Stark’s 2007 work, Coercive Control: How Men Entrap Women In Everyday Life and states,

“Stark identified that DFV is characterized by a pattern of coercive and controlling behavior enacted in the context of intersectional structural inequality. Gender, racialized, economic, and legal stratification produces vulnerability to violence and shapes the forms it takes in specific historical, cultural, and geographic locations. In a setting that normalizes many non-physically abusive behaviors in relationships, survivors and others may minimize these forms of abuse.”

Stark outlines many of the different forms coercive control can take in abusive relationships. One of the forms coercive control takes is in the form of an experimental nature. That is to say, the form of coercive control that is experimental and interactive, rather than generic, evolves through a process of trial and error based on how a victim responds to stimuli. The regulatory regimes in coercive control run the gamut from primitive, transparently self-serving prohibitions or commands to seemingly objective performance standards that the perpetrator appears merely to adjudicate. But with the advent of electronically targeted individuals, the punishments come in the form of electronic shocks or stimulation (ie: torture) to the human body. To draw on an example, in a “letter of instruction” the perpetrator commands the victim “If I decide we sleep together, you humbly comply without a fight. Do not physically resist me; don’t allow me to ask you three times. If you do not answer within 30 seconds after I ask you a question, be prepared to pay for it (Stark, 2007; 206–207).” When another victim failed to comply with her perpetrator’s instruction to hand over $500 of her government relief check, an electronic signal was turned on in her body (ie: head and lower back) as she immediately felt the intensity of the electromagnetic field emanating from her body. On consecutive days the symptoms that followed were a push and pull of an invisible electromagnetic field (ie: a current or wavefield flowed through her body) for not complying with her perpetrator’s request. She also felt the shock of an electromagnetic signal that forced her to almost fall onto the stairs she was walking up.

Electronic targeted assaults against the human body present more of a problem to our culture than our empirical research and understanding of its manifestation provides us. The unanalyzed unconscious fantasies surrounding domination and control that delegitimize another person’s privileges and rights. When conflict and disagreement ensue in intimate partnership relationships, what has evolved in the 21st century with the advent of modern computers, wireless technology, global positioning systems, and “online” devices is the technological-facilitated abusive violence towards victims who have primarily been women and children. We have now arrived at a level of criminality in society that holds the potential to exist and elude capture because its very nature is subtle, clandestine, and surreptitious. How do you prove your loved one, or someone outside your family unit for that matter, “turned on” the electromagnetic frequency when this person hasn’t physically touched you? One thing is certain because the frequency and nature of abusive behaviors described by women who report the violence suggest that technologically facilitated domestic and family violence is real and is a key form of abuse deserving more significant attention and study.

In May 2016, the U.S. Department of Justice published a bulletin through the United States Attorney General’s Office in Washington, DC addressing current issues with cyber misbehavior. It is a worthwhile resource for anyone who has a loved one, close friend, or associate being targeted and stalked by an abusive perpetrator. The problem with cyberstalking, electronic harassment, and electronic torture reside in its effects that can take a toll on the emotional well-being and physical health of the targeted victim(s). And with regard to electronic torture, victims of this type of abuse need even more protection under the law simply because the very laws that have been instituted to protect the general public from such violations apply.

Following the U.S. Department of Justice’s press releases, there have been no arrests made in connection with the type of torture my friend has described to me. The wrongful violation, against the patient’s will of implanting electromagnetic wireless devices that deliver signals to the target’s brain and the private areas of her body, can be defined as “unwanted touching” with remote wireless signals. We are all familiar with the use of vibrators in sex roles. The vibrational signals that are turned on remotely, sensations and experiences my friend has described to me, are received unexpectedly and unannounced. Remote signals that are cast from afar, under the stealth of secrecy, signals that touch intimate body parts, have not been described or prosecuted in any federal case? In any type of treatment therapy, whether it be psychiatry, physical therapy or general medicine, the induced electromagnetic stimulation by a medical doctor is always done in a controlled setting with legal consent given by the patient. What my friend is describing goes against the ethical standards put in place by medical boards that govern such behavior with regard to “treatment” and bring to light many, many questions surrounding violence, culture, videogame culture, men’s sexual aggression towards women and children, the historical dehumanization of men, advancements in technological-facilitated violence, how coercive control work against the autonomy women and children, how sexual grooming plays into these types of perpetrations, and how “beauty” may provoke such harassments and torture.

Source:

Whitehead, N. (2007). Violence & the cultural order. Daedalus, 136(1), 40–50.

Bevens, C., & Loughnan, S. (2019). Insights into Men’s Sexual Aggression Toward Women: Dehumanization and Objectification. Sex Roles, 81(12), 713–730.

Haslam, N. (2006). Dehumanization: An Integrative Review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10(3), 252–264.

Chodorow, N. (2012). Hate, Humiliation, and Masculinity. In Individualizing Gender and Sexuality: Theory and Practice. New York. Routledge. pp.121–136.

Gottschall, J. (2008). The “Beauty Myth” Is No Myth. Human Nature, 19(2), 174–188.

Douglas,.H., Harris, B.A., & Dragiewicz, .M. (2019). Technology-facilitated Domestic and Family Violence: Women’s Experiences. The British Journal of Criminology, 59(3)

Winnicott, D.W. (1971). “The use of the Object and relating through identifications.” In Playing and Reality. Harmondsworth. Penguin, 1980.

Hull, J. (2004). Videogames: Transitional phenomena in adolescence. Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal, 2(2), 106–113.

Stark, E. (2007). Coercive Control: How Men Entrap Women in Personal Life. New York. Oxford University Press.

Cyber Misbehavior. (2016). The Department of Justice Journal of Federal Law and Practice, Vol. 64, №3, pp. 12–29. Department of Justice Journal of Federal Law and Practice

Other papers to consider but not mentioned:

Silverman, R., & Mukherjee, S. (1987). Intimate homicide: An analysis of violent social relationships. Behavioral Sciences & the Law, 5(1), 37–47.

Van Brunt, B., Murphy, A., Pescara-Kovach, L., & Crance, G. (2019). Early Identification of Grooming and Targeting in Predatory Sexual Behavior on College Campuses. Violence and Gender. Vol. 6, №1

Taylor, D., & Strutton, D. (2016). Does Facebook usage lead to conspicuous consumption? The role of envy, narcissism and self-promotion. Journal of Research in Interactive Marketing, 10(3), 231-248.

WRITTEN BYKaren Barna

Mother, Daughter, Gardener, Student, Graduate, Cook, Care-Giver, Lover of Books, Reader of Philosophy, Interested in Psychoanalysis

Dehumanization and Research Findings on Men’s Sexual Aggression Towards Women

Image for post

“Although in theoretical discussions it will usually not be disputed that narcissism, the libidinal investment of the self, is per se neither pathological nor obnoxious, there exists an understandable tendency to look at it with a negatively toned evaluation as soon as the field of theory is left. Where such a prejudice exists, it is undoubtedly based on a comparison between narcissism and object love, and is justified by the assertion that it is the more primitive and the less adaptive of the two forms of libido distribution.” Heinz Kohut, (1966)

How is one to explain a woman’s investment in herself through proper diet and exercise and the complete reversal of these activities, replacing them with completely self-destructive behaviors (excessive alcohol consumption, over-eating, and sedentary lifestyle) if ABUSE isn’t the root cause and reason for its manifestation? It’s manifestation at the hands of abusive clandestine remote neuromodulations.

When aggression and sexual aggression is a global, ongoing problem primarily perpetrated by men, how is it the phenomenon known as targeted individuals and electronically targeted individuals being virtually ignored? I want to scream the reason for this phenomenon from every rooftop in the global world so people may be made aware of its usurpations. Many victim blame and will say, “It’s the victim’s own fault.” Claiming the victim is the one who is responsible for solving the reasons behind their own targeting. Does not a greater threat to man’s existence present itself here!? If 118,000 people in America are being targeted through clandestine advanced technological means, how many other people are at risk for receiving this type of abuse in the near future!?

In a British study of 190 heterosexual men, researchers investigated the correlation link between dehumanization and rape proclivity. Dehumanization was also related to unfavorable attitudes toward rape victims. Also, could we not make a similar corollary between aspects of dehumanization and acts of hostile aggression outside of sexual assault? In a second British study conducted by the same researchers, they sought to experimentally manipulate and dehumanize a woman as a part of their experiment and measure its effect on sexual aggression attitudes and interests of the 190 British males. The researchers reported that 106 heterosexual British men seemed to be particularly driven by one aspect of dehumanization and that was the denial of human uniqueness. This voices a provocative psychoanalytic insight toward prejudicial attitudes surrounding feminine identity in all of its unique forms, at least in the British culture (Bevens & Loughnan, 2019).

“Beauty provokes harassment, the law says, but it looks through men’s eyes when deciding what provokes it.” ~Naomi Wolf, The Beauty Myth (1990).

An interesting aspect of this study would suggest that when emphasizing and highlighting women’s human uniqueness, people unwittingly may draw attention to the female as a target. And this theory can be supported by the man cases of transgender women who are assaulted and killed for the peculiar human uniqueness. Most recently in presidential news was the appointment of Dr. Rachel Levine as Secretary to Health and Human Services by the Biden administration. This raised more concern for me than joy in the thought that our nation is moving much closer to a nation based on social inclusion simply because men who feel they are women on the inside and make the necessary changes to embrace their femininity are sometimes found dead in rivers, woods, and other public areas. Transgender people ARE targets (Schmidt, Wagner, and Armus, 2021).

The proclivity of men to engage in dehumanization and objectification represent two potentially important influences on, not only sexual aggression but, aggression in general. Dehumanization is the process of perceiving and/or treating people as less than human, which can manifest in several ways. Aspects of the dehumanization process are closely connected to perceptions of nonhuman entities that dehumanized people are compared to or seem to represent, or conversely to the nature of the attributes that are denied to dehumanized people. Two forms of dehumanization are proposed, involving the denial to others of two distinct senses of humanness: characteristics that are uniquely human and characteristics that constitute human nature. Denying uniquely human attributes to others represents them as “animal-like”, and denying human nature to others represents them as objects or automata. Cognitive underpinnings to the process of dehumanization and its pervasive presence within social contexts gives us an expanded sense of dehumanization and its emergence as a phenomenon that is not unitary, is not restricted to the intergroup context, and does not occur only under conditions of conflict or extreme negative evaluation. Instead, dehumanization becomes an everyday social phenomenon, rooted in ordinary social-cognitive processes (Haslam & Loughnan, 2014; Haslam, 2006).

Listed here are some ways in which human beings have dehumanized others over the course of history. The first example has been the re-occurring institution of slavery based on ethnicity, race, and gender in both its legally accepted forms as well as it as a hidden clandestine criminal operation as seen in modern day sex trafficking. Black slaves were thought to be associated with the Devil and there are many more examples of the dehumanization process with regard to the institution of slavery starting with the fact that ancient slavery started out of financial debt.

Dehumanization occurs in pornography most often as the female sex object. Women have historically suffered forms of dehumanization as they have been historically relegated to secondary positions as caregivers and domestic housekeepers, serving in menial jobs like cooking. Women have also historically been denied rights. They have been associated with fantasies of animalitynature, and being childlike. But within the realm of pornography, it is interesting to note seven components of sexual objectification have been identified. The first “instrumentality” and “ownership” involve treating others as tools and commodities; “denial of autonomy” and “inertness” involve seeing them as lacking self-determination and agency; “fungibility” involves seeing people as interchangeable with other of their type; “violability” represents others as lacking boundary integrity; and “denial of subjectivity” involves believing that their experiences and feelings can be neglected (Nassbaum, 1999). Sexual objectification of women extends far beyond pornography to the mass culture at large as the normative emphasis on female appearance leads women to take a third-party perspective on their bodies. Many women resort to beauty by proxy in the fantasies of castration using extensive plastic surgeries and breast implants.

People with disabilities have been dehumanized, especially those with cognitive deficits. Cognitively deficient people have been subject to “organism metaphors” that compare them to parasites that infect the social body. “Animalization” also occurs, where the “feebleminded” are denied full humanity on account of their reportedly high procreation rates, their inability to live cultured lives, their presumed insensitivity to pain, their propensity for immoral and criminal behavior, and their instinctual rather than rational nature (Haslam, 2006).

In the field of medicine, people have historically been dehumanized since the institution of the modern clinic. “The concept of dehumanization features prominently in writings on modern medicine, which is said to dehumanize patients with its lack of personal care and emotional support; its reliance on technology; its lack of touch and human warmth; its emphasis on instrumental efficiency and standardization, to the neglect of the patient’s individuality; its related neglect of the patient’s subjective experience in favor of objective, technologically mediated information; and its emphasis on interventions performed on a passive individual whose agency and autonomy are neglected.” This form of dehumanization has been described as objectification and the denial of qualities associated with meaning, interest, and compassion (Haslam, 2006).

Technology in general and computers, in particular, are a common theme in work on dehumanization. Montague and Matson discussed the “technology of dehumanization” or “the reduction of humans to machines” in their book The Dehumanization of Man. Evidence of this dehumanization is reflected in the “pathological pursuit toward mechanization” that involves a pursuit for androids, robots with efficient regularity in an automaton-like rigidity and conformity, and an approach to life that is unemotional apathetic, and lacking in spontaneity (Haslam, 2006). This very aspect was “joked about” in Ira Levin’s The Stepford Wives, and with the invention of neuromodulation that regulates brain activity along with synthetic implants (silicone breasts) and plastic surgery, humanity may be very well on its way to a new level of silicone-plastic usurpations of human bodies. Human objects that are regulated by superior men in order to control their behavioral responses.

With regard to criminality, the paranoia that can spark feelings towards the dehumanization of objects has transcended levels previously known. As technology has evolved at an explosive rate with global positioning systems, Android computers, Smartphones, Smart TVs, Smart Houses, Android systems, Google Earth, and Find My Device features on cellphones can now track people’s whereabouts, and biological implants that respond to electromagnetic fields which are contributing to some individuals phenomenon of gang stalking and electronic targeting and are re-enforcing and supporting the same seven components found in pornography and the sexual objectification of Objects; “instrumentality”, “ownership”, “denial of autonomy”, “inertness”, “fungibility”, “violability” and “denial of subjectivity”. In particular, it is the Object’s “violability” that is amplified with regard to electronic assaults as it strongly “represents others as lacking boundary integrity”. This holds true because the invisible nature of the electronic assaults gives the victim no way of defending him/herself. How is one supposed to protect one’s boundary integrity if that person can’t see their attacker? Theories found in the psychic life of power and theories in subjugation might help explain this abnormal psychological approach and the phenomenon known as the targeted individual (Butler, 1997).

In the area of moral exclusion and disengagement the moral dimensions of dehumanization in the context of sanctioned mass violence, focusing on the conditions under which normal moral restraints on violence are weakened. Hostility generates violence indirectly by dehumanizing victims, so that no moral relationship with the victim inhibits the victimizer’s violent behavior. Dehumanization involves denying a person “identity” — a perception of the person “as an individual, independent and distinguishable from others, capable of making choices” and “community” — a perception of the other as “part of an interconnected network of individuals who care for each other”. When people are divested of these agentic and communal aspects of humanness, they are deindividuated, lose the capacity to evoke compassion and moral emotions, and may be treated as means toward vicious ends (Haslam, 2006).

In the British study I mentioned at the beginning of this paper, the researchers reported that 106 heterosexual British men out of 190 seemed to be particularly driven by one aspect found in the demonstration of dehumanization of a woman who was manipulated as part of the research study and that aspect was the denial of human uniqueness as this research study was based in man’s proclivity towards sexual assault might we not draw a connection to the anal-sadistic universe and forms of archaic sadism? I am not suggesting that these men be considered any less human than other men because sadism is an aspect of human consciousness and all men must learn how to navigate sadistic and masochistic tendencies.

In psychological accounts of dehumanization, the delegitimizing beliefs regarding the other group or person are analyzed. These beliefs assign extremely negative characteristics and attributes to the other group or person, with the purpose of excluding it from acceptable human groups and denying it humanity. Delegitimizing beliefs share extremely negative valence, emotional activation typically from contempt and fear, cultural support, and discriminatory rejection of the outgroup or person.

In the attempt to assign delegitimizing beliefs surrounding a group or a person, the pathological attempts of using electromagnetic frequency stimulation and sedation (electromagnetic fields such as RF fields) are a part, in my opinion, of the dehumanization process as it suggests the group or the person has been “labeled inhuman, a nonhuman entity” in some way, representing them as some type of negatively valued fantasy of evil such as a “demon”, “monster”, or “Satan” as a way of providing the other person or group with a sense of superiority (Haslam, 2006).

Another way people dehumanize objects is based on a sense of their own personal values. People’s values “express their distinctive humanity,” so “beliefs about a group’s value hierarchy reveal the perceiver’s view of the fundamental human nature of the members of that group.” When an outgroup is perceived as having dissimilar values to the ingroup, it is perceived to lack shared humanity and its interests can be disrespected (Haslam, 2006). In the opening of the paper, I included a quote by Kohut. If the libidinal interest in the self is neither pathological or obnoxious, then why is it always perceived with a sense of negativity? This negativity has been labeled “prejudice” by Kohut. What makes this an “understandable tendency” to house this sense of prejudice towards objects? For example, take a woman’s libidinal interest in keeping her body healthy by routine exercising and healthy dieting? I know some women, and perhaps some men, may receive this knowledge with a sense of negativity or repudiation? Or take, for example, a woman’s or man’s libidinal interest in their aesthetic object selection with regard to marriage. What would make his or her selection be received with a sense of negativityWould it be misogyny or misandry? Perhaps racial or ethnic prejudice? Perhaps a lack of shared values? Or is it just part of man’s tendency to delegitimize objects? Is it based on the human tendency to morally exclude and disengage certain groups and individuals from the community? The answer to this question is certainly a profound and possible yes! These all could represent a reason why certain individuals within a social order are electronically targeted and tortured.

Source:

Kohut, H. (1966). Forms and Transformations of Narcissism. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 14(2), 243–272.

Bevens, C., & Loughnan, S. (2019). Insights into Men’s Sexual Aggression Toward Women: Dehumanization and Objectification. Sex Roles, 81(12), 713–730.

Wolf, Naomi. (2002). The Beauty Myth. New York. Harper Collins.

Schmidt, Samantha, Wagner, John and Armus, Theo. “Biden selects transgender doctor Rachel Levine as assistant health secretary.” The Washington Post. Published online January 19, 2021. Retrieved online January 21, 2021. https://www.washingtonpost.com/health/2021/01/19/rachel-levine-transgender-biden-hhs-pick/

Haslam, N. (2006). Dehumanization: An Integrative Review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10(3), 252–264.

Haslam, N., & Loughnan, S. (2014). Dehumanization and Infrahumanization. Annual Review of Psychology, 65, 399–423.

Nussbaum, M.C. (1999). Sex and social justice. Oxford, England. Oxford University Press.

Montague, A., & Matson, F. (1983). The dehumanization of man. New York. McGraw-Hill.

Ira Levine. (1972) The Stepford Wives. New York. Random House.

WRITTEN BYKaren Barna

Mother, Daughter, Gardener, Student, Graduate, Cook, Care-Giver, Lover of Books, Reader of Philosophy, Interested in Psychoanalysis

Fatherhood in the Psychoanalytic Literature and Unconscious Attempts at Mastery over Dependent Introjects During Paternal Adult Development

Master second poster: Vijay demands your silence ...

By Karen Barna

There was a term I learned of recently in my exploration of this amazing peer-reviewed journal resource. This term is called Paterfamilias which is a Latin term for the ancient Roman conceptualization of fatherhood. As described by Colleen McCullough in her wonderful series of historical novels about Roman life, the paterfamilias was the head of the family. His right to do as he pleased with his family was rigidly protected by law. He was expected to be kind, loving, and generative, but he had the legal power to be an unchallenged dictator if he so decided; he could choose his children’s spouses, and could even put them to death for severe transgressions (Colarusso, 2005).

“Modern-day versions of the paterfamilias still exist in some cultures, but in the Western world, such total paternal power exists only in the realm of fantasy,and in film and literature (Colarusso, 2005).”

The head of the paterfamilias are characters we might associate within movies like the “Godfather.” Although expected to be kind, loving, and generative, these dominant male heads had the power to be an unchallenged dictator if they so decided, putting those in the “family” to death for severe transgressions against his will. Two classics that offer an excellent representation of aging fatherhood and the internal psychic struggles in late adulthood is William Shakespeare’s King Lear and Tennessee Williams’ Cat on a Hot Tin Roof. Both these classics do illustrate the psychoanalytic tenet that all development, healthy or pathological, has at its core internal conflict; for every father in late adulthood must struggle with his approaching mortality, his complex feelings about the appraisal of his children, and his intrapsychic response to their ambivalence toward him in caring for his aging body. It is here I’d like to explain why I am using this particular analytic. I am referring to this analytic because of the “intrapsychic response to the complex feelings of the father surrounding the appraisal or disapproval of his children and his ambivalence towards him, especially in caring for his aging body.” The material I am going to be referencing strictly is geared to the psychology of fatherhood in late adult development (age 60 to 80 and beyond) and I’m going to make a suggestion that the “children” in his perspective may not actually be his biological children, but perceived as such (that is to say, as a “child subordinate”) in derangement of perception. I reference this because I believe I am dealing with a pathological personality; a paterfamilias the like of John Gotti, a psychopath whose derangements in thinking are bent and twisted through a distorted lens of perception. Particularly relevant to this focus on late adulthood is Pollock’s comment (1998) that “development, obviously, is not the same as growth and can include progression, regression, new constructions, remodeling, and in some ways, decline.” (p. 44).

In dealing with the pathological, the paterfamilias, or head of the family exerts control and dominance over his “children” who may also be called his subjects (see Butler, 1997). From the beginning of time, sons have coveted what their father’s had — although always fearful of his power and ability to castrate and kill — and were willing to band together to take, through violence if necessary, the progenitor’s power and possessions. And it’s important to note that money and women are two possessions that are of significant interest to men lacking them. It is interesting to learn that some men unconsciously make a move to master their sons through dominance and control when they select a wife. This is because in normal male psychological development the narcissistic fear of the aging body especially in late development as it pertains to fatherhood through the age 60 to 80 and beyond, is rooted in the fear of the father’s loss of identity as being a capable PROVIDER for his wife and “children”. We can make a connection to this paternal gender role and the psychology found in Freud’s Oedipus complex as it being part of the “idealized father” or Ego Ideal.

As illustrated in King Lear and Cat on a Hot Tin Roof, and in the interactions described in various case vignettes between fathers and their children by psychoanalysts, the rise of civilization may have tempered but has by no means eliminated the envy, money grasping, cajoling manipulations and violence. Scenes of this destructiveness described in Totem and Taboo, and to which Freud discovered considerable clinical confirmation to prove his theory establishing castrating fears in the human psyche, in particular in the case of Little Hans (1909).

“It was Freud who has shed enormous insight on the psychologically dangerous aspects, especially for the immature boy, regarding the boy’s relationship with his father as formulated in Freud’s Oedipus complex. Freud returned repeatedly to the consideration of violence and competitiveness underlying the relationship between fathers and their sons through the concept of the ‘primal horde (Colarusso, 2005).’”

In my culture, I have witnessed the envy, money grasping, manipulations for inheritance, cajoling manipulations, and violence and sadism rooted in narcissistic masculinities. So, I have to laugh at and shake my head at critics like Judd Marmor’s commentary regarding sadism being the recurring “myth” in psychoanalytic literature when almost every civilization that has endured; ancient, modern, and post-modern have always resorted to war and destruction as a reoccurring solution to a problem (please see Marmor and Gorney, 1999; Chessick, 1996). What’s more, is the fact that intrapsychic conflicts emerge at each stage of adult development based on our early Oedipal relationships and these conflicts constantly need to be reworked during every stage they appear in. Therapy, therefore, in this light helps to maintain neutrality towards Objects, and psychoanalysis is a medical service that is mostly unattainable for most working-class men who never acquire an understanding of the technique as well as the process behind this analytic approach and its need for continuous re-work and repair. Therefore, in many men, these unconscious psychological specters that affect men’s behavior remain hidden and undisclosed to the subjects themselves, existing never fully aware of the influence these past introjects and identifications have on their behavior. For example, there are “developmental tasks” that are expected to be completed at certain stages of adult development. In late-life development, tasks pertain to maintaining physical and mental health, sexual and emotional intimacy, conducting the life review, and preparing for death. There are a different set of tasks one is expected to complete during the third separation-individuation phase of development as well. It is important to note that the separation-individuation process can be derailed or rendered “incomplete” due to the infliction of psychic trauma or the experience of cataclysmic traumatic events such as war and earthquakes. The importance of the developmental tasks at each stage cannot be stressed enough. As many forgo the work because they are not aware of how adult development is expected to progress or they may be oppressed by poverty and psychopathic personalities.

With regard to the Operator/Controller using electronic targeting assaults over my body and mind, a female subject, I have to ask the question, What kind of unconscious attempts of mastery over the Oedipal introjects exists here in the psyche of the Operator/Controller? And were these introjects “malevolent introjects”? And have these unconscious specters been worked through as part of the psychological re-work for the continuation of normal adult masculine development? (please see Jacobs, 2007)

“A “father’s” attitude toward his “children” is also strongly influenced by internalized images he has of adult experiences with his own father, now likely dead for many years (Colarusso, 2005).” Likewise, a “mother’s” attitude toward her children is also strongly influenced by internalized images she has of her mother during childhood. Like any good investigator, the psychoanalysts want to know, “What was the nature of these relationships, both with the father as well as the mother?” As well as the question, “How was the individual’s relationship affected by their Oedipal arrangement and what was the outcome?”

In late adult development aged 60 to 80 and beyond, “a father’s attitude toward his children is determined by how each of them expresses a willingness to care for him and his wife as their realistic and emotional needs increase in late adulthood.” These are the psychic conflicts and struggles each adult father struggles with and are demonstrated in the Shakespearian play King Lear and Tennesse William’s Cat on a Hot Tin Roof. These same psychic conflicts and struggles are present for mothers/wives as well. What will be the solution for those couples who never had children? Who will take care of them? The solution to this dilemma is approached differently by the individuals. For pathological personalities who are stuck in an infantile state of development, the solution may be malign. Psychoanalysts are constantly re-working their internalized introjects in order to maintain neutrality when dealing with their patients. So, a psychoanalyst isn’t going to pass judgment as to whether a person’s actions were “right” or “wrong”. It is up to the psychoanalyst to listen and analyze, then try to re-create the symbolic relationship in an attempt to help the child re-work his perceptions and opinions. Courts of law are the entities that pass judgment in deciding whether a crime has been committed, whether someone’s actions violated the boundaries of civil law. This is not up to the psychoanalyst to decide, rather listen and understand the patient’s current progress. Psychoanalysts may render opinions about the characterology of a person’s personality but to say whether that personality is “right” or “wrong” is really inconsequential to the role of the psychoanalyst, provided the person does not pose a threat to the general public, themselves, or to the analyst.

For me, in dealing with my family, I can tell you I am dealing with “mafia mentality” and the “paterfamilias.” A pathological head that needs to addressed. Anyone who wants to harness direct control over a person’s body and mind through clandestine surreptitious means has issues with control and, in all likelihood, is dealing with psychic specters that persist because they are malevolent introjects. These are issues serial rapists and serial murders; serial thieves have to struggle against on a daily basis. Unconscious attempts at mastery over their internalized Objects and the identifications associated with those introjects. In short, bat shit fucking crazy!

SOURCES: (Some of these sources were referenced in the paper and some were not. All these works still provide significant importance to the subject matter at hand.)

Benjamin, Jessica. (1995). Like Subjects, Love Objects: Essays on Recognition and Sexual Differences. Binghampton, New York. Vail-Ballou Press.

Butler, Judith. (1997). The Psychic Life of Power: Theories in Subjection. Stanford, CA. Stanford University Press.

Chasseguet-Smirgel, Janine. (1984). A Re-Reading of ‘Little Hans’. In Creativity and Perversion. London. Free Association Books. (pp. 35–43).

Chessick, Richard D., M.D. (1996). Archaic Sadism. Journal of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis, 24(4), 605–618.

Colarusso, Calvin (2000). Separation-Individuation Phenomena in Adulthood: General Concepts and the Fifth Individuation. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 48(4), 1467–1489.

Emde, Robert N. (1985). From adolescence to midlife: Remodeling the structure of adult development. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association. 33:59–112.

Erikson, Erik. (1963). Childhood and Society. New York. Norton.

Freud, S. (1909) Analysis of a phobia of a five-year old boy. The Pelican Library, Vol. 8, Case Histories, (pp. 169–306).

Freud, S. (1921). Group psychology and the analysis of the ego. Standard Edition. Vol. 28. pp. 67–144.

Freud, Sigmund. (1924). “The dissolution of the Oedipus complex.” Standard Edition. Volume 19. London. Hogarth Press.

Jacobs, Amber. (2007). On Matricide: Myth, Psychoanalysis, and the Law of the Mother. New York. Columbia University Press. (pp. 78–79).

Jones, E. (1927). The early development of female sexuality. In Papers on Psychoanalysis. London. Maresfield Reprints.

Kohut, H. (1971). The Analysis of the Self. International Universities Press. New York.

Kohut, H. (1977). The Restoration of the Self. International Universities Press. New York.

Marmor, J., & Gorney, R. (1999). Instinctual Sadism: A Recurrent Myth about Human Nature. Journal of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis, 27(1), 1–6.

Pollock, George H. (1998). Aging or aged: Development or pathology. In The Course of Life: Completing the Journey, ed. G.H. Pollock & S.I. Greenspan. Madison, CT: International Universities Press, pp. 41–86.

Stark, Evan. (2007). Technology of Coercive Control. In Coercive Control: Entrapment of Women in Personal Life. New York. Oxford University Press. (pp. 228–288).

Walker, Michelle Boulous. (1998). Philosophy and the Maternal Body: Reading Silence. New York. Routledge.

Wallin, David J. (2007). Attachment in Psychotherapy. New York. The Guilford Press.

Weiland, Christina. (1996). ‘Matricide and Destructiveness: Infantile Anxieties and Technological Culture.’ British Journal of Psychotherapy 12, №3; 300–313.

Winnicott, D.W. (1971). “The use of the Object and relating through identifications.” In Playing and Reality. Harmondsworth. Penguin, 1980.

WRITTEN BYKaren Barna

Mother, Daughter, Gardener, Student, Graduate, Cook, Care-Giver, Lover of Books, Reader of Philosophy, Interested in Psychoanalysis

The Evolution of Paternal Identity versus Maternal Identity in Adult Development

Image for post
The Evolution of Adult Development

NOTE: This is a psychoanalytic working through of the theory behind the Paternal Identity versus the Maternal Identity with regard to the traditional gender roles they fill within the role of parenthood and their continuing adult development. Part of this theory was written by Calvin Colarusso based on fears pertaining to men who still have dependent children and to which I assume extreme wealth does not belong.

For the most part, I had studied psychic female development from a feminist’s perspective. I had not explored many papers on male psychic development, other than Freud’s theories on the Oedipus complex and his paper on Little Hans. But in studying a few papers written by Calvin A. Colarusso it appears to me that the psychoanalytic state of late adulthood, one which may be embroiled with a considerable source of intrapsychic conflict and narcissistic injury resulting in envy, hostility, and distorted relationships with younger males in the aging patriarch’s family, for the most part, maybe the same for narcissistic women in middle adulthood. I also find it interesting, Calvin A. Colarusso’s ethnicity is Italian and so it’s intriguing to find out how his ethnic heritage may have influenced his theories and opinions. Richard D. Chessick, M.D., has suggested in his paper Archaic Sadism“We must ask why different psychoanalytic orientations tend to prevail in different countries, and to what extent these ideological orientations illustrate the effect of history and culture on the formation of one’s psychoanalytic self.” There tends to be a very high degree of narcissism found in ethnic Italian families, at least in Northeast America, and I am a descendent to a second-generation Italian immigrant. Even still, one can most certainly understand the anger and hostility at the aging body when previous feelings surrounding it were full of feelings of competence, strength, and vitality.

According to Calvin A. Colarusso, in normal male psychological development the narcissistic fear of the aging body, as it pertains to fatherhood in late parental adulthood age 60 to 80 and beyond, is rooted in the fear of the paternal identity’s inability to no longer be a PROVIDER for his family and we can make a connection to this paternal gender role and the psychology found in Freud’s Oedipus complex as being part of the “idealized father.” This fear may manifest envies, hostilities, and distorted relationships with younger males in the patriarch’s family surrounding his loss of ability and the fact these young me are still quite capable of being just that, A FUNCTIONAL PROVIDER to their own families and wives.

“Throughout the life cycle, her intrapsychic life has been alive with introjects. From the original incorporation of the pre-Oedipal mother and the internalization of the Oedipal father, and continuing through the multitude of projections and fantasies of pregnancy, childbirth, and motherhood; the overriding theme of female development has been the internalization of and identification with objects (Holmes, 2008).”

It has been theorized by Nancy J. Chodorow, traditionally speaking, that little boys do not introject their mothers in the same way as little girls introject their mothers. However, in normal female psychological adult development, there is far less a fear pertaining to the female’s ability to be a PROVIDER because that is not the traditional role women are expected to fill, although there may be some fear surrounding this issue if they have lost a spouse. However, for our discussion, let’s assume, for the most part, it is the male that is usually the “breadwinner.” The narcissistic fear for the middle-aged woman is found in her inability to NO LONGER BEAR CHILDREN. That is to say, the woman finds herself post-menopausal and barren. This fear surrounds feelings of no longer being the fruitful womb that could be the extension of a man’s manifest ‘masculine narcissism,’ of being the female Object that has attracted the male’s gaze and his sense to ‘conqueror’ her sexuality through the act of intercourse and impregnation. For pregnancy is the source of female power, just as the phallus is the source of dominant male power and both are rooted in one’s gendered sexuality respectively. A female’s loss of fertility could be equated to male castration of the penis and testicles. NOTE: I need to distinguish here between the fantasy of conquering a person due to direct feelings of envy and hatred which differs from this psychoanalytic theory because of the absence of the element of fantasy, that is the fantasized harming of an Object as this discussion is strictly entertained based on feelings of envy and anger which differ from fantasy and is something to which the phenomenon of the Targeted Individuals receiving electronic assaults, electronic harassment, electronic torture, and abuse belongs; that is to say, to the realm of fantasy and the fantasized harming of Objects. So, back to our discussion. Combined here are two intertwined female’s fears; one, the aging body through menopause with the cessation of her period, and two, the fear of her loss of beauty and her inability to sexually attract the male’s gaze because of her aging body. The loss of aesthetic beauty is part of the aesthetic involved in satisfying her male counterpart’s desire and to which outcomes of childbirth and family are connected; i.e., HER POWER. These two psychoanalytic theories based on sexuality contribute to the difference between the sexes with regard to the continuous separation and loss of identity during the aging process and in adult human development which is a continuous and lifelong process. The basic difference between the genders with regard to aging adult development arrives first at the cost of the female’s denial of a penis and her acceptance as a “second class sex” subjugated by a dominant male patriarch, and where the little boy retains his penis (i.e., phallic power) and makes a move towards identifying with the idealized father as the dominant sex in the power structure. The second betrayal arrives as the denial of fertility through the on-set of aging, the female’s inability to procreate during post-menopause, something retained by all fertile men throughout their life. And this denial of “pro-creative power” will arrive at some future time when she will be either forced into retirement by her employer, her children, or her spouse or willingly surrender to it herself. Either way, the arrival of her inability to produce work and provide any real income may also come as a narcissistic blow to her ego. However, the loss of fertility arrives much early for females than do males, as men’s ability to continually be fertile is never lost. So, this fundamental, yet very important difference between women and men arrives at three important psychic milestones for women. First during Oedipus as the female realizes she has been denied a penis and is a castrated being, and then, it arrives a second time well before the fifth stage of separation-individuation, when she loses her fertility during post-menopause, and the third arrival is reached during retirement in late adult development when she can no longer be as effective as a provider in terms of her earner POWER in producing the work and income she has always known. Although some retired women work part-time, the income usually awarded them is menial. In female development, a woman has had to navigate many different narcissistic losses, pregnancy and childbirth being one, but the above three narcissistic losses are the ones I chose to discuss here which cause women to introject castration and mourn the loss of her “power.” Women, for the most part, by the fifth and final stage of separation-individuation in adult development, are well versed in acceptance of her body, with all of its betrayals during Oedipus, pregnancy, and childbirth, and with the onset of age and loss of her fertility, leading up to the final and ultimate loss, the loss of life itself. In my opinion, these gender differences are something that contributes to lower rates of violence perpetrated by women, as perhaps women are better suited for working through and mourning loss because of their subjugated role as caregivers, for the most part! (Fox and Fridel, 2017)

The Catholic Church has prophesied that “The Impostor” will come and lead men astray. This impostor is known as the anti-christ or the Devil, the enemy of all that is good; a malevolent figure. In Islam the Impostor Messiah is called “Al-Masih ad-Dajjal”; the false messiah, the liar, the deceiver, the devil. It makes for an interesting connection that fits nicely with Colarusso’s comment,

“In late adulthood, a normal dissonance develops between the sense of self and the body image. As a colleague expressed it after looking in the mirror on reaching age seventy, “Who is that impostor staring back at me?”

This feeling is evidence of a discrepancy between the sentient self and the body image. This is something that happens to both men and women, but it seems to me, this dissonance may arrive much earlier for women, starting between the age of 40 to 60. It seems to me this psychoanalytic theory on the “evil in man” and the aging impostor has its connection to malevolent introjects as being something rooted in “inactivity,” “disease,” and the “aging body” and its connection to the castrated and weak “little girl,” (femininity). That is, these malevolent introjects revolve around notions of phallic power and not around notions of being the castrated female. For me, the connection to the notion of “Al-Masih ad-Dajjal” and the arrival of the aging body is the paranoid fear surrounding the loss of mobility and in turn a loss of a person’s sense of identity, and this is connected with the person’s sexuality simply because sexuality is power and is associated with phallic dominance and not castration. The narcissistic insult of late adult development arrives with the onset of disease, altered physical appearance, and diminution of function, paranoid fears surrounding one’s self-identity, abilities, and sexuality virility, all become questioned. [THIS IS THE PURPOSE FOR THE ELECTRONIC TARGETING TORTURE, AT LEAST AS I HAVE EXPERIENCED IT!] This theory becomes intriguing because in studying abnormal psychic development, I believe the phenomenon known as the Targeted Individual receiving electronic targeting, electronic torture, and the physical abuse associated with this type of electronic harassment to be rooted in malevolent introjects based in the paranoid-schizoid position which manifests delusions surrounding the “Al-Masih ad-Dajjal” but now not only do I realize that my perpetrator may most likely be MALE, but that there exist a slim possibility that my perpetrator may also be a WOMAN, and not just any woman but AN AGING WOMAN. I know of several aging women in my neighborhood including a new neighbor who built a house right next door to ours on an empty lot and who is in real estate, but I’ll save that for another discussion. But let’s continue the discussion surrounding the fear of the aging body.

For many, the passage from youth to old age is marked by a shift from the pursuit of wealth to the maintenance of health. For women, at this fourth developmental stage aged 40 to 60, a more focused effort on diet and exercise may take place as the onset of early diseases and interest in its prevention may become a concern for well-being, health, and extended life expectancy. Diseases like breast cancer, diabetes, high blood pressure, and cardiovascular disease are major concerns for many Americans. The onset of type 2 diabetes was one event that occurred in my personal life as I have a family history of diabetes. Even though I exercised and dieted most of my life to maintain health and lower body weight, I had always been a borderline diabetic. A genetic condition, in my opinion, and genetics are much more influential over outcomes especially when it is in combination with electronic targeting, electronic harassment, and electronic torture and abuse. It is also at this age, when women who were previously active and fairly productive providers may begin to “slow down” and start doubting their own body image against younger objects in their relational world, similar to Colarusso’s comment regarding the evolution of paternal identity in late adulthood. Women at this stage may ask Who is this impostor staring back at me?” Of course, cosmetics, hair dye, focus on clothing that flatters the aging body can counter-act these doubts but, of course, financial means are a factor, and poverty is not kind in helping the aging female in this regard. As Colarusso stated, “In late adulthood, that is age 60 to 80, a normal dissonance develops between the sense of self and the body image.” In studying female development, I believe this may occur for women at a much earlier stage, and they may experience higher degrees of narcissistic injury with this psychic dissonance. In normal development, as the aging body begins to replace the former midlife preoccupations of career and relationships as central intrapsychic concern envy, hostility, and distorted relationships with the younger males in the aging patriarch’s family may occur (Colarusso, 2005). “This is so because of altered physical appearance, normal diminution in function, and increased incidence of physical illness. However, the body in late adulthood can remain a source of pleasure and feelings of competence if attention is paid to a healthy diet, regular exercise, and preventive medical care (Colarusso, 2005).”

But let’s return to Freud who has shed enormous insight on the psychologically dangerous aspects, especially for the immature boy, regarding the boy’s relationship with his father as formulated in Freud’s Oedipus complex. Freud returned repeatedly to the consideration of violence and competitiveness underlying the relationship between fathers and their sons through the concept of the “primal horde.”

“From the beginning of time, sons have coveted what their father’s had — although always fearful of his power and ability to castrate and kill — and were willing to band together to take, through violence if necessary, the progenitor’s power and possessions (Colarusso, 2005).”

So, here it becomes interesting because one might begin to understand the targeting of female individuals and how electronic torture may play into masculine narcissism in the thwarting of the “progenitor’s power” and “the taking or destroying of possessions” and this hints towards obstructing another man’s sense of power if the female object is “destroyed” and yet some how is allowed to survive as Winnicott theorized (Winnicott, 1971). If sons have always coveted their father’s possessions then, and I as a female Object could be considered a possession, then this might explain the act of electronic targeting. Another aspect of hate, humiliation, and masculinity is the sense of defeat in being humiliated by another male.

Sources:

Balsam, Rosemary. (2012). Women’s Bodies in Psychoanalysis. East Essex, Canada. Routledge.

Chodorow, Nancy. (2012). Hate, Humiliation, and Masculinity. In Individualizing Sexuality and Gender: Theory and Practice. New York. Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group. (pp. 121 –136).

Chasseguet-Smirgel, Janine. (1984) A Re-Reading of Little Hans. In Creativity and Perversions. London. Free Association Books. (pp. 35 –43).

Colarusso, Calvin A. (2005). The Evolution of Paternal Identity in Late Adulthood. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 53(1), 51–81.

Fox, James Alan and Fridel, Emma E., Ph.D. (2017). Gender Differences in Patterns and Trends in U.S. Homicide, 1976 0 2015. Violence and Gender. Vol. 4, №2.

Freud, Sigmund. (1905). “Three essays on the theory of sexuality.” Standard Edition, Volume 7. London. Hogarth Press.

Freud, Sigmund. (1924). “The dissolution of the Oedipus complex.” Standard Edition. Volume 19. London. Hogarth Press.

Holmes, Lucy. (2008). The Internal Triangle: New Theories of Female Development. New York. Jason Aronson.

Winnicott, D.W. (1971). “The use of the Object and relating through identifications.” In Playing and Reality. Harmondsworth. Penguin, 1980.

WRITTEN BYKaren Barna

Mother, Daughter, Gardener, Student, Graduate, Cook, Care-Giver, Lover of Books, Reader of Philosophy, Interested in Psychoanalysis.

Human Aggression: Primal Archaic Destructive Aggression and The Sexual Instinct

By Karen Barna

The theory of Erickson (1963), Emde (1985), and Pollock (1998) “is that psychic development is continuous, lifelong interplay of biological, environmental, and intrapsychic forces. Development has been defined as ‘the emergence of forms, of function and of behavior which are the outcome of exchanges between the organism on the one hand, the inner and outer environment on the other’” (Colarusso, 2000). But this development can become stymied if blocked learning occurs, or is allowed to occur, and here I make reference to the occurrence of electronic targeting and electronic assaults on human minds and bodies using electromagnetic frequency and to which society has termed this phenomenon Targeted Individuals. Under normal conditions, psychic development is continuous and lifelong and this is directly associated with one’s abilityto learn effectively. “Erikson was the psychoanalytic pioneer who extended the concept of development throughout adulthood with his Eight Stages of Man. Following in his footsteps, Emde wrote: “First and foremost, we must realize that the developmental thrust is not over in adolescence — far from it. There is a continuous dynamic process, and the adult personality continues to undergo structural changes . . . . It may be in fact that the psychology of adult development is an important for clinical psychoanalysis as is the psychology of early development” (Colarusso, 2000). With that said, it is important to recognize detrimental effects that can influence psychic development in the wrong ways, and here I am specifically referring to electronic targeting and the use of electromagnetic frequency (RF) used on the minds and bodies of civilian subjects, at large, at the hands of an oppressive tyrant who desires to be the Master-Controller(s) over a small population of people. One cannot forget the detrimental influences of the Trump administration and the connections to his hate speech (language) that may have contributed to the actions of Caesar Sayoc who sent mail bombs to several of Trump’s critics, as well as the siege on the US Capitol on January 6, 2021.

George H. Pollock wrote, “Development, obviously, is not the same as growth and can include progression, regression, new constructions, remodeling, and in some ways, decline.” (p.44).

We can make an association between how environmental factors detrimentally affect psychic development, as seen in the side-effects of war and trauma, and one could most certainly agree that these environmental factors that affect psychic decline, especially if they are allowed to continue, can ultimately affect general overall health and well-being. And with this, of course, I am referring to the electronic targeted attacks of individuals’ bodies and minds by a Master-Controller(s) who wishes to seek dominion and subjugation over another (Butler, 1997).

It’s interesting to note that although the mother-child dyad is the foundation on which all other relationships are built, the father-child dyad seems to eclipse that of the mother’s importance in the relationship during the Oedipal phase of development. According to Freud in his ‘Dissolution of the Oedipus Complex,’ Christina Weiland writes, “What follows the dissolution of the Oedipus complex is not the establishment of a parental couple but, on the contrary, its destruction. What follows is an idealized/castrating father ruling over a desexualized ego and a repressed maternal world. Ernest Jones, in opposition to Freud, saw the phallic phase as following the Oedipus complex (1927). He maintained that to save his penis the boy gives up mother and substitutes her by his penis. In this reading of the outcome of the Oedipus complex masculine narcissism incorporated in the penis replaces the longing for mother and the accompanying dread of castration. Whichever way we read it; however, the castration complex is central to the outcome of the Oedipus complex (Freud, 1924; Jones, 1927; Weiland, 1996).”

According to Jones, in substituting the mother alongside his penis, my interpretation is the mother becomes the Object possession in the little boy’s relational world and instead of allowing the mother to survive as an equal, the little boy incorporates ‘masculine narcissism.’ In this scenario, the mother in the parental couple is obliterated and is not allowed to survive as the little boy joins in identification with the father. It is for this reason Freud’s castration complex has been called the “psychotic text” of Western culture by many feminists. It does not allow for the possibility for the mother’s survival alongside father as an equal subject. That is, as a parental couple equal to each other and in unison with one another. We could argue that what should follow Oedipal relations, in fact, should be instead a peaceful resolution with the co-existence of the father and the mother in the psyche. But this doesn’t occur in Freudian theory. In fact, the very opposite occurs. What occurs is the destruction of the parental unit through the subjugation of the mother to a lower position. This all hints toward the roots of archaic sadism found in the human psyche and to which we can explain Jessica Benjamin’s statement “Sex is violence (Benjamin, 1995).” And here one could speak regarding parental arguments and fights in full view of the children. If aggression, degradation, and dehumanization of objects are allowed to be witnessed during a child’s early and latent development, then to what extent could these events contribute to the derangements, distortions, delusions, and perverse solutions occurring culturally. And how much of a role do socioeconomics, wealth, and privilege influence positive outcomes. Psychoanalytic theory should never undercut the importance of biological reasons as an important contributor to outcomes, we know DNA can contribute to a person’s personality as much as 50%. “In studies of twins reared apart, researchers concluded that 70% of differences between IQs in twins is due to genetic variation (70% heritability); the remaining 30% of differences is caused by environmental factors, which is similar to previous research (Dixon, 2019).” This suggests that DNA hardwires us all to certain predestine outcomes like Alzheimer’s, sickle cell anemia, breast cancer, IQ, and even psychopathy.

There is a powerful instinctual aggressiveness in humans. Freud called this instinctual aggressiveness or barbarizing tendency “regressive tendency” (Chessick, 1996). But isn’t this “regressive tendency” inherent in the ‘masculine narcissism’ acquired by the little boy theorized by Freud in his Oedipus complex (castration complex)? For one could argue that when a man allows for his sadism to be unleashed on to the Object other, in castrating fashion, it is enjoyed with a high degree of narcissistic enjoyment. This, for the most part, is certainly true. For how else is one to explain the narcissistic enjoyment (sadism) in watching your opponent lose in competition?

For Freud, in normal psychic development, the death tendency is the primary manifestation of a death instinct that is independent from the libido. It has been commented by some feminist psychoanalysts that the death instinct may not be independent from the libido as Freud has postulated. This diverges from Freud in which he theorized the death tendency is the primary manifestation of a death instinct that is independent from the libido (Caropreso, 2017). Thus, the life instinct bound by the libido in the sexual drive is part of what Freud called Eros. However, in studying the aberrations and anomalies of personality and sexual deviance, it has been stated that “Sex is violence (Benjamin, 1995).” Because of this perception that “Sex is violence” which most certainly has its roots in Freud’s Oedipus complex, sexual violence is contained within the dialectic of sexual intercourse and is symbolically repeated in the stabbing of the phallus into the vagina or anus which produces orgasm. And it’s interesting to note the French word for orgasm is “la petit mort” or little death. La petite mort is an expression used by the French which means “the brief loss or weakening of consciousness” and in modern usage refers specifically to “the sensation of post-orgasm as likened to death, and here one might make a reference to the act of asphyxiation during orgasm with the brief loss of consciousness that results. Yet in another theory, sexual violence can also be explained by the existence of pornography which seeks to degrade the object into themes revolving around the aesthetics of beauty with images of the masculine and feminine sexual Ideal with the pure sexual satisfaction and narcissistic enjoyments being derived at the expense of these objects. It has also been theorized that in acts of sexual sadism, the multiple stabbing with a knife into a victim mimics the act of sexual penetration during coitus. Although these theories have pertained mostly to abnormal development and sexual deviance, areas that significantly deviate from traditional gender roles and sexual relations, one could most certainly make a connection between masculine narcissism incorporated in the little boy’s penis that replaces the longing for mother and the accompanying dread of castration by the father as “Sex is violence” as well as its connection to the obliteration of the parental couple. It can also explain the manifestation of a wide range of counter-phobic objects that pervade our culture. If you think of counter-phobic objects as the following; all weapons (guns, knives), cosmetics and plastic surgery, designer clothing, designer handbags, and designer accessories, religion with all its amulets and fetished motifs like the religious cross, expensive cars, remote electronic devices that cast a tethered signal that is wired biologically via an implant to a human Object. The latter falling under “weapons”. In terms of sexual deviance,how is one to explain the desire by a woman, to strap on a mock penis, and penetrate the vagina of her love object (another woman) if these are not acts pertaining to masculine subjugation? Does not the ‘strap on penis’ become the counter-phobic object? The idealization of father and his powerful penis? Or the domination found in a man’s desire to use the anus of another man as a ‘mock vagina’ in subjugation to his sexual ‘power’ and domination? Acts of masculine prowess exerted over other men in prison, thereby making the actual phallus the counter-phobic object. ‘The power over another’ is how all acts of subjugation are carried out. Although, speaking in terms of unequal power distribution, subjugation often arrives at the expense of the powerless, especially when it is rooted in phallic omnipotence. The currency of this type of domination often arrives at the expense of ‘voice’, or the inability of the powerless “to speak” or “to be heard,” and this may be a voice that may or may not actually be heard, but is somehow always ignored. We could also make a connection to the fact that acts of BDSM are often a sexual pleasure enjoyed by many homosexual men and some lesbian women and the connection to these acts may be found in the roots of sadism as explained in Freud’s castration complex. In my opinion, there exists a residual theme of primitive sexual sadism rooted in Freudian theory explaining sexual orientation and gender relations; the psychotic text of Western culture that helps explain narcissism, gender orientation, sexual orientation, and psychosis. This same complex is the complex that strands us all on the shores of our psychic sexual development. So, in this way, one might say we are all “stranded objects” so to speak.

“…that psychic development is continuous, lifelong interplay of biological, environmental, and intrapsychic forces. Development has been defined as ‘the emergence of forms, of function and of behavior which are the outcome of exchanges between the organism on the one hand, the inner and outer environment on the other’.” (Colarusso, 2000)

It is important to recognize that the proclivity toward brutality and paranoid projection is constantly present in the unconscious of every human being. Heinz Kohut believes the original drive in infancy is assertive in nature, and changes to hate and aggression only as a consequence of phase-inappropriate disappointments in empathic soothing. “For example, Bertrand Russell said that because of the haunting fear of ruin that most people have, anything that increases the general security is likely to diminish cruelty. Obviously general security cannot be achieved by making one portion of mankind secure at the expense of another, as this only increases the dominant group’s fear that the oppressed will rebel” (Chessick, 1996).

It is precisely this, “the dominant group’s fear that the oppressed will rebel,” and the use of electronic weapons through electronic attacks, harassment, and torture is being used as a way, and I use Winnicott’s (1971) theory, to ensure that the object survives, and by survive we mean not rebel. That is to say,regarding the electronic targeting of individuals, at least as I have experienced them, the Object receives the abuses in his/her environment and is conditioned through electromagnetic frequency not to rebel but instead accept and “appropriately” respond to the abuse. It is complete manipulation and exploitation of an Object, albeit with remote clandestine hidden attacks of electronic targeting; a seduction utilized for the viewing entertainment of an audience with the pure narcissistic enjoyment being experiencedby the Operator/Controller’s successful subjugation of his/her victims. It is unethical, inhumane, and unnecessary torture of human beings. And reviewing the events of the Trump administration, we can see how a person with a personality disorder can incite hatred in the minds of people who already have a proclivity toward destructive acts and to which was referenced in the paper Archaic Sadism, “It is clear from group psychology as studied by Freud (1921), that groups tend always and naturally to behave toward each other as children or primitive savages; there is a collective lowering of intellectual ability of the group just by virtue of its being a group. This barbarizing tendency, as I shall call it (Freud calls it a regressive tendency), is inherent in the psychological nature of all groups, and it calls out continuously for a particular type of leader (Chessick, 1996).”

Chessick wrote:

“Our time has seen the encounter with nothingness. This has been brought about by the decline of religion and belief in God and in an eternal moral order, the collectivization of the state backed by a brutal police and based on the creation of either artificial consumer needs or dogmatic mythologies with subsequent depersonalization of the individual, and the advance of science, which has destroyed all sense of certitude in nature and reduced our conception of our role in the universe to an irrelevant minimum. Nietzsche has been recognized as the original spokesman for the dangerous consequences of the first of these factors, Jaspers for the second, and Kierkegaard for the third.

Kierkegaard (1954) claimed that all humans are in existential despair, and that three categories of solution have been found: the religious, the unsuccessful, and the demoniacal. It is the “demoniacal” solution to existential anxiety — our anxiety over the irrelevance and brevity of our lives — that is of interest in the present context.”

Kierkegaard’s philosophy was referenced in an analysis of the major motion thriller “Prisoners”. The demoniacal solution, and we can compare cases of electronic targeting and electronic torture with regard to the level of sadism similar to the demoniacal solution found in the movie Prisoners which was a perverse solution in retaliation to God (the religious) for the unjustly taking of one mother’s child through a cancer death; and the reason for the same mother’s retaliation in an imaginary war against God in the kidnapping and killing of other people’s children. The demoniacal solution is the perverse solution. In the case of electronic targeting and electronic torture, it becomes the imaginary war waged in eluding psychic death or thereby vindicating a person’s bruised and damaged ego as the result of psychic loss. In subjugating the feared, hated, and/or repudiated Object through advancing technology (remote radio frequency) the demoniacal solution can be achieved by the Master/Controller(s) in wish-fulfillment fantasy. Kierkegaard’s 1954 philosophy, Fear and Trembling takes up the story of Abraham and Isaac to explore a faith that transcends the ethical, persists in the face of the absurd, and meets its reward in the return of all that the faithful one is willing to sacrifice, while The Sickness Unto Death examines the spiritual anxiety of despair.

As noted in Archaic Sadism“There is a great need for cooperative exploration by psychologists, psychiatrists, and philosophers into the notion of a demoniacal and counterphobic solution to existential anxiety (Chessick, 1996).” I have noted in previous writings the electronic device that allows the Master/Controller(s) their ability to electronically harass, electronically target, and electronically torture must act as a counter-phobic object that allows for the dissolution of psychic anxiety generated by the targeted Object in defense for this psychic discomfort!

Chessick’s view is that all humans are born with a primal biological archaic aggressive-destructive drive and that the gratification of this innate biological drive provides humans the same satisfaction as the sexual drive. And here we might consider Sabina’s Spielrein’s contribution “Destruction as Cause of Come-into-being” (1912), a paper that theorized a death instinct within the sex drive. Although Spielrein’s theory of a death instinct differs from Freud’s theory of a death instinct, she formulated her ideas well before Freud and influenced Freud in his own personal work “Beyond the Pleasure Principle” (1920) in which he formulated the philosophical death instinct theory we now have today. Where Spielrein believed a death instinct within the sexual instinct, where Freud believed the life instinct and the sexual instinct were closer together and grouped these drives under Eros. Freud believed the life instincts include the sexual instincts and the instincts for self-preservation, which are directly opposed to the death instincts. Speilrein’s maintains an opposition between the drive for self-preservation and the drive for preservation of the species — still defended by Freud at the time of his text’s writing — embedding the death instinct within the drive for preservation of the species. By “Speilrein precisely in supposing a death instinct within the sexual instinct, considers the destructive urge to be indistinguishable from a reproductive urge, as expressed in the tendency for dissolution and assimilation. Thus, for her, the destruction driven by the death instinct is indistinguishable from the creation of something new (Caropreso 2017). “ Here, Speilrein is saying when the two germ cells, the egg and the sperm, join together the “destruction as the cause of coming into being” arrives in the annihilation of the egg and sperm cell and there ceasing to exist, thus becomes the new life form. However, at least to me, this isn’t as much of a “destruction” as it is a transfer of information, and perhaps a lack of understanding on the biological recombination of genes is due to her error. However, on a level of physics in which atoms and particles become annihilated, perhaps we could continue this theoretical discussion? In any event, Freud’s contributions made her theory somewhat obsolete. In conclusion, it is important to note that “destruction as the cause of coming into being” can be metaphorically understood through Freud’s castration complex. It is important to note that a primal biological archaic aggressive-destructive drive grants human subjects the same satisfaction as the sex drive and this primal biological archaic aggressive-destructive drive is closely connected to abnormal development, sexual deviance, and psychosis. Although Freud’s Oedipus complex describes fairly accurately how psychosis can develop, we do not perceive it in this light as we have been conditioned to accept it for psychoanalytical law and “normal” development.

Chessick writes,

“But what sort of civilization is most suited to this task? Every child develops a set of basic fantasies, both sexual and aggressive, and sometimes combined, based on an intermixture of misunderstood experiences, such as the inevitable birth of siblings, disappointments in expectations of parental empathy, traumatic or overstimulating events such as the primal scene, and so forth. These are fired and fueled by and intermixed with the innate sexual and aggressive drives, producing highly charged core fantasies that often have little relationship to the child’s actual parents or experiences, assuming an average expectable environment. But they have psychic reality for the child, they determine perception and behavior all through adult life, and they may be extremely sadistic and require projection as a defense against being overwhelmed by them. The secret of why sadistic torture, sexual abuse, and rape generate so much intense pleasure and why terrorism, violence, and brutality generate so much narcissistic elation lies in the acting out of these archaic fantasies by pathological individuals for whom the childhood environment was neither average nor expectable. Again, we are into matters both paranoid and paranoiac. Granting that the helpless child must project his or her sadism onto the world, which subsequently increases the need for protecting against the imagined evil coming from outside — witness this problem as expressed in innumerable fairy tales — how can we develop a civilization that minimizes the reality validation of this projection and helps channel fundamental human aggression into sublimation and neutralization?”

Is our contemporary international civilization, the so-called “advanced” parts of the world, such as the United States, Europe, and Japan, which are at the forefront of technology, most suited to this task? Or do these wonderful examples of advanced capitalism have built into them just the opposite effect? As psychoanalysts we cannot at this time resolve the issue of the origin of sadism, but we can exert an influence on our culture by calling attention to those aspects of it which foster and abet sadism and confirm the malevolent transformation and the projection of intrapsychic hatred and destructiveness onto the “Other,” justifying drive-by shootings, wars, racial and religious prejudice, and so forth.”

We must ask why different psychoanalytic orientations tend to prevail in different countries, and to what extent these ideological orientations illustrate the effect of history and culture on the formation of one’s psychoanalytic self.

Will the U.S. in its need to maintain the illusion that in a capitalist society humans are inherently rational and decent and will make rational choices about what they consume and how they treat each other?

Chessick further writes,

“Ours leads to the devastation of the Earth as the condition for a promised guaranteed high standard of living and happiness for all, the darkening of the world, the flight of the gods, and the transformation of humans into a mass with a hatred and suspicion of everything free and creative and into devotees of speed and time-saving devices who paradoxically seem to have no time. Even the arts are just for pleasant diversion and entertainment, not for expression of truths about ourselves and our world.”

And here is where we need to encourage the artist within us and in our children a little more by encouraging the connection between the psyche, philosophy, and art thereby becoming cultivators of the visual, musical, and performing arts instead of telling our children art isn’t important and that the time spent on artistic projects are a waste of their time because they do not serve the scientific money-generating gods that inundate our market economies and flood our stores with electronic gadgets and the latest cutting-edge time-saving technologies.

We can most certainly understand how the pandemic of COVID-19 has affected us and how we are protecting ourselves from infection, yet we are unable to inoculate ourselves from the fear, hatred, repudiations, and paranoias that periodically release violence, torture, terrorism, and brutality onto the world; sadism in its most archaic forms. Violence is a plague that has never been wiped out by vaccination and it just maybe that it never will be completely annihilated; kept as a sample, a small reminder, in some lab freezer of what human existence used to look like. Much like a vial of smallpox that has now been exterminated from our viral living world.

We ask the questions,

What type of culture will be best be suited for promoting civilized behavior? What type of culture will best be suited to neutralize barbarizing tendencies? What type of culture will be best suited for sublimating the tremendous sadistic proclivities contained in the psyches of all humans, thereby winning the war against violence and sadism? What culture will reign supreme in overcoming this plague?

Sources:

Benjamin, Jessica. (1995). Like Subjects, Love Objects: Essays on Recognition and Sexual Differences. Binghampton, New York. Vail-Ballou Press.

Butler, Judith. (1997). The Psychic Life of Power: Theories in Subjection. Stanford, CA. Stanford University Press.

Caropreso, Fatima. (2017). The death instinct and the mental dimension beyond the pleasure principle in the works of Spielrein and Freud. The International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 98(6), 1741–1762.

Chessick, Richard D., M.D. (1996). Archaic Sadism. Journal of the American Academy of Psychoanalysis, 24(4), 605–618.

Colarusso, Calvin (2000). Separation-Individuation Phenomena in Adulthood: General Concepts and the Fifth Individuation. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association, 48(4), 1467–1489.

Dixon, Travis. (2019). Key Study: The Minnesota Twin Study of Twins Reared Apart. Themantic-education.com (IB Psychology). Published online February 11, 2019. Retrieved online January 13, 2021. https://www.themantic-education.com/ibpsych/2019/02/11/key-study-the-minnesota-twin-study-of-twins-reared-apart/

Emde, Robert N. (1985). From adolescence to midlife: Remodeling the structure of adult development. Journal of the American Psychoanalytic Association. 33:59–112.

Erikson, Erik. (1963). Childhood and Society. New York. Norton.

Freud, S. (1921). Group psychology and the analysis of the ego. Standard Edition. Vol. 28. pp. 67–144.

Freud, Sigmund. (1924). “The dissolution of the Oedipus complex.” Standard Edition. Volume 19. London. Hogarth Press.

Jones, E. (1927). The early development of female sexuality. In Papers on Psychoanalysis. London. Maresfield Reprints.

Kierkegaard, S. (1954). Fear and Trembling and Sickness Unto Death. Princeton University Press. Princeton, NJ.

Kohut, H. (1971). The Analysis of the Self. International Universities Press. New York.

Kohut, H. (1977). The Restoration of the Self. International Universities Press. New York.

Pollock, George H. (1998). Aging or aged: Development or pathology. In The Course of Life: Completing the Journey, ed. G.H. Pollock & S.I. Greenspan. Madison, CT: International Universities Press, pp. 41–86.

Weiland, Christina. (1996). ‘Matricide and Destructiveness: Infantile Anxieties and Technological Culture.’ British Journal of Psychotherapy 12, №3; 300–313.

Winnicott, D.W. (1971). “The use of the Object and relating through identifications.” In Playing and Reality. Harmondsworth. Penguin, 1980.

WRITTEN BYKaren Barna

Mother, Daughter, Gardener, Student, Graduate, Cook, Care-Giver, Lover of Books, Reader of Philosophy, Interested in Psychoanalysis

The Mythical Imaginary of Medusa and the Gender Differences on Murder

Image for post
Image of Medusa whose head was severed by Perseus in Greek Mythology. Another interesting point, Perseus is depicted in relief as a young male warrior. Gender differences in U.S. trends of homicide reflect young male attitudes toward women and they are statistically more likely to be violent perpetrators.

December 27, 2020:

As I have been working through my theory on the group phenomenon of electronically Targeted Individuals (TIs) here are some additional thoughts I like to add from my own personal experience with electronic targeting and gang stalking:

With regard to my analysis in saying the psyche of the person doing the electronic targeting possess the knowledge that women fear largeness, that all women are too familiar with this fear and the accompanying degradation and concern with bigness and expansiveness, inspiring feelings of anxious unsettledness in Western culture’s psychodynamic with regard to reactions to female flesh. To say that women fear this image of largeness is to associate fears surrounding the female pregnant body which renders the Object a subordinate, impotent, and effeminate being. One of the most dangerous positions a woman can place herself in is in the position of fecund expectation of childbirth. For it is in this position she becomes dependent with a dependent. This is what made me believe, at first, the perpetrator(s) of the crimes being carried out against me, electronic assaults and electronic targeting, which I was receiving was or is a WOMAN. This psychodynamic is something understood by most female psychoanalysts who study female development. By using electronic torture, the perpetrator projects on to the feared “bad object” the mark of humiliation and repudiation, the large expansive body, rendered and kept humiliated, repudiated, and subordinate to a higher power; a Master with an electronic tether to his Object … Here the perpetrator to the crime can enjoy the sensations phallic enjoyment brings, that is, in the pleasures of watching the growth of expansive largeness, with delight and excitation to the little boy’s links to power and dominance with the phantasy of his hard erect phallus. (see Gates, 2000) But this is Freudian male Oedipal development, not female Oedipal development? How is it then, that it has become reversed in what appears to be a staged re-enactment of a perverse, procreative fantasy of dominant male power?

Although it is by passive-aggressive means the degradation and humiliation of the targeted Object have taken place, aggression is still aggression, and the electromagnetic tether, that is, the electronic device used by the perpetrator must act like a counter-phobic object; a security blanket that protects the perpetrator like a cloak from the anxieties that are produced by the Object being targeted for which the perpetrator(s) fear, envy, hates, repudiates or all of the above (see Winnicott, 1971, Playing and Reality). In the further preponderance of psychoanalytic theory, females have a tendency to employ more logical reasoning and passive-aggressive behavior than men. Men tend to employ more violence in more active, outwardly aggressive outbursts against their targets using brute force, physical prowess, and phallic weaponry. Were women, in this regard, do not. Gender differences in rates of homicide statistically show that men are more likely to be violent perpetrators and women are much less likely to employ violence, but when they do kill, they kill by drowning, poisoning, strangulation, and suffocation (see Fox and Friedel, 2017). These are typically more subtle, passive-aggressive means to kill. But, suffice it to say, the electronic tether (the electronic device that tethers the Object to its “Master” is an extension of the phallus.

It must also be considered that the process of higher education seeks the goal of passive-aggressive problem-solving strategies. That is to say, collegiate or well-educated men employ similar strategies to problem solve in terms of conflict resolution or difference. They will use deductive logic, logical reasoning, and the prowess of advanced communication (language) to problem-solve versus aggressive outbursts of destructive physical action (violence). And since I believe the phenomenon of electronic targeting or the targeted individual (TIs) is a passive-aggressive form of “communication” utilizing language thru the use of advanced technologies, such as remote radio transmitters and other electronic mechanical devices, we could make a comparison between the profiles of the two; the rational world of scientific intellectuals versus the rational world of intelligent serial killers (see Cohn, 1987). So, while I believed at first it might be a woman, it is also likely this person may be male and in possession of a college degree, an advanced college degree with unanalyzed unconscious phantasies regarding their mothers. And so, it is we MUST CONSIDER the perpetrator(s) to these crimes may very well possess advanced technical knowledge in science or medicine, perhaps even a Ph.D. or M.D. This is what makes me believe the group phenomenon of targeted individuals may be part of advanced medical research or part of an experimental program with the US government.

Furthermore, regarding the mythical imaginary, the symbolic registering in the realm of the mythical head of Medusa which was decapitated from the body of the gorgon and used as a weapon until being kept as a souvenir and then placed on the shield of Athena, in comparison to the electronic targeting, the device that is emitting electromagnetic frequency signals from my head, we might use this myth to conclude the possible motive for the torture; a deadly weapon implanted in the head of an individual female rendering “the Medusa head” inoperable of her own volition. What, if anything, and this is purely conjecture, might be kept as a souvenir by the perpetrator? Ultimately, whatever it is, will be kept hidden, a secret by the perpetrator but it could be a photograph, clothing, hair, or some other personal possession of the victim. Or perhaps it is the counter-phobic object; the remote control from which he controls his puppet. This remains to be seen and is not fact, but it is psychoanalytic Truth. This Truth is based on psychoanalytic theory.

In terms of social science and psychology, I think it important to note the way our society socializes young men in the industrial war complex and the effects of individual, unanalyzed, unconscious phantasies towards their mothers, and their fathers, for the purpose of exploiting these men based on their social disadvantages and manipulating their vulnerabilities for the greater purpose of totalitarianism. Placing advanced weaponry in the hands of young men and socializing them into believing that aggressive, violent action is what makes them “men” and while these men see one single catastrophe after another, the wreckage piles up before them. And as this pile of debris grows before their feet, they are left with the memories they can’t unsee. As debris, left in the wake of catastrophe upon catastrophe, grows skyward, it becomes the left-over psychic mess from the winds of a storm we call progress.

Image for post
Anselm Kiefer “The Angel of History”at the Israel Museum in Jerusalem

Anselm Kiefer’s sculpting “The Angel of History” inspired by the artwork of Paul Klee’s “Angelus Novus“. The sculpting is of a pile of books on to which the wings of an angel are affixed. The pile of books is tattered and worn as are the wings of the angel. The pile of books symbolizes man’s intellectual works or man’s progress throughout history. On the wall behind the sculpting by Anselm Kiefer’s “The Angel of History” is inscribed the following phrase:

Lnrache der Vogel — Folconelli

Which is German, I think, and translates into English as saying something like “Revenge the Bird“.

According to several experts and philosophers, Paul Klee painted what is imagined to be the Angel of History by many (Angelus Novus). Klee was conscripted into the German forces during World War I and was deeply affected by this. According to Walter Benjamin, who acquired the painting in 1921, whilst fleeing the Nazis in 1940: “… A Klee painting named Angelus Novus shows an angel looking as though he is about to move away from something he is fixedly contemplating. His eyes are staring, his mouth is open, his wings are spread…” Could this have been the connection Walter Benjamin made with the painting? Was it a premonition to the time he would have to depart Nazi Germany?

Angelus Novus shows an apparently aghast angel, eyes glued to an image of despair, stuck in a flying motion neither going forwards nor backward. This painting has been commented on by psychoanalysts, historians, and philosophers. The fact the Angel of History is “stuck in a flying motion neither going forwards or backward” suggests it may be a relic of history, or a “stranded object” stuck in Time, as it is left suspended or “confined” to a particular moment in human history. Not unlike many Nazis following the downfall of the Third Reich.

In studying unconscious fixed phantasies and the work by Eric L. Santner “Stranded Objects: Mourning, Memory and Film in Postwar Germany” many of man’s repetition compulsions repeat themselves throughout history. Conflict, war, destruction, and delusion were the products of World War I and inspire very similar feelings to the tone of Paul Klee’s Angel of History. The human race will be doomed to forever watch as the debris just piles up at its feet unless it is willing to do the work of mourning.

Citations and Sources:

Gates, Katherine. (2000). Deviant Desires: Incredibly strange sex. New York. Juno Books.

Winnicott, D.W. (1971). “The use of the Object and relating through identifications.” In Playing and Reality. Harmondsworth. Penguin, 1980.

James Alan Fox, and PhD Emma E. Fridel. Gender Difference in Patterns of Trends in U.S. Homicide, 1976–2015“. Violence and Gender. Vol. 4, №2. June 1, 2017.

Carol Cohn. Sex and Death in the Rational World of Defence Intellectuals. Signs. Vol. 12, №4. Summer, 1987. Within and Without: Women, Gender, and Theory.

Other Reading Sources to consider:

Rosemary Balsam. (2012). Women’s Bodies in Psychoanalysis. East Essex, Canada. Routledge.

Lucy Holmes. (2008). The Internal Triangle: New Theories of Female Development. New York. Jason Aronson.

Lucy Holmes. (2013). Wrestling with Destiny: The promise of psychoanalysis. New York. Routledge.

Janine Chasseguet-Smirgel (1984) Creativity and Perversion. London, England. Free Association Books.

Danielle Knafo and Kenneth Feiner (2006) Unconscious Fantasies and the Relational World. Hillside, NJ. The Analytic Press, Inc.

Joshua A. Perper and Stephen J. Cina (2010). When Doctors Kill: Who, Why, and How. New York. Copernicus Books.

Michael Foucault (1978). The History of Sexuality. New York. Pantheon Books.

Amber Jacobs (2007). On Matricide: Myth, Psychoanalysis, and the Law of the Mother. New York. Columbia University Press

Bruno Bettelheim (1954). Symbolic Wounds: Puberty Rites and the Envious Male. Glencoe, Ill. Free Press.

Nancy J. Chodorow (2012). Individualizing Gender and Sexuality: Theory and Practice. New York. Routledge

Jessica Benjamin. (1995). Like Objects; Love Objects: Essays on Recognition and Sexual Difference. New Haven. Yale University Press.

Juliet Mitchell (2000) Mad Men and Medusas: Reclaiming hysteria. New York. Basic Books.

Michelle Boulous-Walker (1998) Philosophy and the Maternal Body: Reading silence. London, England. Routledge.

Judith Butler (1997). The Psychic Life of Power: Theories in Subjection. Stanford, California. Stanford University Press.

Christina Wieland. Matricide and Destructiveness: Infantile Anxieties and Technological Culture. British Journal of Psychotherapy. Vol. 12, №3. (1996): 300–313.

WRITTEN BYKaren Barna

Mother, Daughter, Gardener, Student, Graduate, Cook, Care-Giver, Lover of Books, Reader of Philosophy, Interested in Psychoanalysis

Matricidal Destructiveness and Infantile Anxieties in an Age of Advancing Technological Culture (Final Proof)

King Farouk of Egypt in foreign exile after he was thrown out of power in 1952.
King Farouk of Egypt in foreign exile after he was thrown out of power in 1952.

I cannot even begin to think of a better quotation to open this discussion than from the film “Angels and Demons” when the killer said to Tom Hanks and the female physicist he was with, in the Vatican, that he wasn’t paid to kill them, and so, was going to let them live but if they chose to follow him, well, then that was a different story. He issued the following warning to them before he left:

“Be careful. These are men of God.”

King Farouk of Egypt came to symbolize over-indulgence, in excess, corruption, in-effective weak governance, and kleptocracy as he was perceived as stripe mining the nation’s wealth and leaving the Egyptian people poorer.

In symbolism, his body image is associated with the female pregnant body. Lucy Holmes wrote, “Childbirth is woman’s talisman, manifest and indisputable evidence of female power. The ability to create new life is the earliest and most profound source of power, and we all, men and women, fear it.” (Holmes; 2013) This fear is born out of the paternal superego based in defence protection because of the idealization of the father and of the masculine. It has its origins in the defence against the omnipotent bad mother — omnipotent because she is needed, omnipotent because she is desired, omnipotent because she is identified with, omnipotent because she is hated, omnipotent because she is seen to have murdered the father. (Weiland; 1996)

Nancy J. Chodorow and Adrienne Harris wrote in the foreword of Rosemary Balsam’s work “Women’s Bodies in Psychoanalysis“:

“We are all too familiar with the fear and accompanying degradation of women, the concern with bigness and expansiveness, the anxious unsettledness in cultural and psychoanalytic reactions to female flesh. By contrast, it has been a hallmark of writing about male oedipal development to think of the pleasures of bigness, the delight (and fear) in the boy’s links to power and expansiveness. Balsam asks us to question how these processes get reversed when it comes to the maternal body?” (Balsam, 2012).

In my opinion, because the superego is a paternal superego the female pregnant body represents the void; laziness, weakness, lack of discipline, oppression, subordination, and passivity as its constitution even though it symbolizes the power of female fertility and the power of femininity it is not perceived in this light because of the idealization of the father. In fact, the maternal symbolic order is a far cry from the talisman of male phallic symbolism. A symbol that has been historically represented to display the power of male fertility and the phallus or King was the shape of an obelisk. Long, lithe phallic power that resembles a penis. We can find modern cultural examples of human proclivity towards the male symbolic in the fashion industry. All one has to do is look at the runway model.

In psychoanalysis, we understand the introjection of the female pregnant body as the symbolic for maternity and its healthy introjection allows for little girls the ability to embrace their power and be open to motherhood. We use the perspectives of Sigmund Freud’s Oedipus to explain the little boy moves away from the mother and toward identification with the father’s penis which is a symbol of active, dominant, warrior, protector, and self-disciplined (Freud, 1924). But this move away from mother happens with little girls as well especially through ambivalent attachment or what is known as the ambivalent breast. The ambivalent breast is characterized as a breast that is frustrating and if the ambivalent breast surpasses the frustration tolerance of the infant then a sudden violent, traumatic rupture with mother is theorized to occur (Jacobs, 2007; Klein, 1946). Female attacks on the female body permeate modern culture. Anorexia nervosa, bulimia, cosmetic plastic surgery; breast enlargements, breasts reduction, noses, thighs and bellies are modified to achieve some ideal of beauty. “The concept of “beauty” lives deep in the psyche, where sexuality mingles with self-esteem. Fashion insists that beauty can be bestowed from the outside. It is essentially visual; all the other senses, smell, taste, touch and sound, that make a woman erotic, are effectively cancelled out … What is deeply, essentially feminine — the life in a woman’s expression, the feel of her flesh, the transformations of childbirth and menopause, are reclassified as ugly or diseased. Fat and aging are transformed into conditions that must be altered by beauty products [and by advances in technology] (Wolf, 2002; Holmes, 2013).” But the attacks don’t just stop at the plastic surgeon’s office. Attacks against the female body have been pervasive throughout modern Western culture which will be described in the section on femininities and masculinities, and attacks have been carried out by both men and women alike. The weaponizing of technology in the form of electronic radio frequency assaults, remotes that control biological implants, the use of cell phone technology, global positioning systems, and the advent of electronic weapons of war has opened the door for a new age of matricidal destructiveness and war on crime. Through what Freud called the Electra complex and penis envy little girls can also experience a sudden violent, traumatic rupture/loss and separation from the mother as well due to this ambivalence and hints to this matricidal destructiveness can be seen in the disorders of anorexia and bulimia (Freud, 1905; Freud, 1925; Freud, 1931; Freud, 1932). As a result, some little girls strongly identify with their fathers and if the rupture against the mother is a complete foreclosure, homosexuality (lesbianism) can develop or a disturbed personality in paranoid fear of castrating, not only maternal Objects but also paternal Objects, in the little girl’s object-relational world (Jacobs, 2007; Klein, 1946; Klein, 1964). It is for this reason personality disorders are closely studied alongside sexual orientation and gender issues.

Julia Kristeva felt the separation from the mother was such a complex issue that if separation didn’t happen in the correct way abnormal psychological development could ensue. Kristeva felt matricide is our psychic necessity if individuation is to occur in the establishment of our own unique identities (Kristeva, 1989). Lacan believed the violent rupture from the maternal order is necessary for the establishment of the symbolic order or patriarchy. This may be true if we are speaking in terms of the “traditional” symbolic order of feminine and masculine, but as you know there are peculiarities to consider, anomalies that do not fit “traditional” gender relations or “normal” personality growth.

Julia Kristeva wrote poetically when she wrote in her work ‘Stabat Mater’ the following:

“For more than a century now, our culture has faced the urgent need to reformulate its representations of and hate, inherited from Plato’s Symposium, the troubadours, and Our Lady, in order to deal with the relationship of one woman to another. Here again, maternity points the way to a possible solution: a woman rarely, I do not say never, experiences passion — love or hate — for another woman, without at some point taking the place of her own mother — without becoming a mother herself and, even more importantly, without undergoing the lengthy process of learning to differentiate herself from her daughter, her simulacrum, whose presence she is forced to confront (Walker, 1998).”

What is missing from Freudian analysis and ‘Dissolution of the Oedipus Complex‘ is the possibility that some individuals do not experience a violent rupture, they experience a gradual working through of the loss and separation from a mother who makes them feel secure which can be explained by attachment theory (Wallin, 2007; Main, 1995; Klein, 1959). The violent rupture seems to occur as a result of the ambivalent breast and not a result of secure attachment. As a result, depending on the specifics of each individual’s development, the rise of unique psychic growth patterns due to a diversity of maternal psychic conflicts and/or foreclosures occur thus creating troubled personalities first observed by Freud and known as ‘Fort-da’ or the compulsion to repeat and the child’s use of objects as mastery over his/her reality (Freud, 1920; Benvenuto and Kennedy, 1986; Knafo and Feiner, 2006; Weiland, 1996, Winnicott, 1971). Juliette Mitchell described in her work, Madmen and Medusas: Reclaiming hysteria, that attachment can be undone through the onset of difficult and frustrating environments as we have seen in such cases of the side-effects of war, and so, we can see how trauma can affect a person’s attachment, undoing or disturbing it through manipulative, destructive, infantile acts that inflict trauma in the minds of an Object by a “Master“, and is observed in cases utilizing modern advanced technological culture (i.e., electronic weapons, cyber misbehavior, and global positioning systems, etc.) to manufacture a particular reality (Mitchell, 2000; The United States Attorney’s Bulletin, U.S. Department of Justice, May 2016).

“Subjection is defined as the act or fact of being subjected, as under a monarch or other sovereign or superior power; the state of being subject to, or under the dominion of another; hence general subordination.” ~Oxford English Dictionary.

In the case of one Targeted Individual (TIs) the simultaneous use of cell phone/computer blocking technology to frustrate the Object, and then, at the same time deliver electro-convulsive shock therapy to sedate the frustrated Object is on par with the Nazi Holocaust medical experiments. The Operator/Controller (i.e., the “Master“) is the Dr. Mendel of Jewish extermination practices! (Perper and Cina; 2010). In addition, regarding this one particular case of a Targeted Individual, receiving unexpected, unannounced, and un-consented electronic assaults to her body in the middle of the night was part of the torture and abuse. At approximately 3:45 AM in the morning, the victim is reported as being awakened by the turning on of an electromagnetic field (RF) and then receiving electro-convulsive shock stimulation to the brain. These are but only two accounts of the torture and abuse the victim has received at the hands of some unknown assailant (see Butler, 1997). We can make a comparison between Targeted Individuals (TIs) suffering electronic assaults with the grooming and targeting practices used by sexual predators on college campuses. One facet of sexual predation on college campuses is the expressed behavior by those individuals interested in preying on others to meet their own sexual needs and/or exert a sense of power and control through sexual assault and rape. Predators use coercion and grooming behaviors to lower the defenses of the target and increase their vulnerability to sexual violence. Predators seek to lessen a victim’s ability to advocate for personal safety and disempower them from bringing concerns forward to authorities. These behaviors also occur in social settings where the targets are softened through environmental factors such as unrestricted access to mass quantities of alcohol, parties with limited exits or lacking quiet, safe places to check in with supportive friends, and the saturation of misogynistic or sexually charged posters, music, or visual displays (Van Brunt, Murphy, Pescara-Kovach, and Crance, 2019). One of the aspects to one individual’s account of targeting through electronic assault was the ability, through remote radio frequency control, to lower the conscious awareness of the individual in lieu of alcohol or sedating drugs. This capability opened up access to the victim so that the predator(s) could victimize the target. It also allowed analysts to point to Winnicott’s theory (1971) theorizing an important aspect of object relations was the survival of the object, and by survival, we mean the object doesn’t retaliate.

It is important that we realize the internal struggle of men exists on both an individual level as well as a cultural level. So, I want to include a passage from Christina Weiland’s paper, ‘Matricide and Destructiveness: Infantile Anxieties and Technological Culture‘ which was published in the British Journal of Psychology in 1996:

“It is a truism to say that all our patients are engaged in an internal struggle with their objects, especially the mother. This struggle, hidden for some, open for others, seems to underlie the human condition. In this sense it constitutes a fundamental human problem — the solution to which is both an individual and a cultural one. This fundamental human condition has to do with an inadequate separation from the maternal object and the need to separate and individuate. Culture, as a space where the working through of fundamental human problems takes place, constitutes a container; culture, as an ideal and a prohibition, constitutes part of the superego. For the individual the solution to any particular psychic problem will depend on both his/her object relations as well as the cultural space. So, when I refer to matricide I do so on both levels — the individual and the cultural (Weiland, 1996).”

The Differences Between the Genders Regarding the Introjection of the Mother

At this point in the paper, I would like to discuss the psychic fear of becoming the “maternal imago” both in the female psyche (Holmes, 2008; Balsam, 2012) and the male psyche (Freud, 1924; Chodorow, 2012). How the female pregnant body can be perceived as “humiliating” because it represents effectual leadership/governance, over-indulgence, subordination to a higher power, oppressed, weak, diseased, undisciplined, and the “feminine little girl” who lacks a penis. For women who have incorporated a paternal superego, void of a positive female pregnant body experience will, in all likelihood, reject maternity and repudiate motherhood for the repressive, humiliating symbol it represents to her ego (Balsam, 1986; Walker, 1998; Holmes, 2013; Kristeva; 1977). And how so, too, the overweight, fat, ineffectual male paternal body can be used, at least in an imaginary sense, to fill this same symbolic mythical imaginary as the “weak little girl“. Something we will come to realize as one of the fault lines and fragilities of man’s narcissistic ego in the formation of the ego Ideal; that is, modern, dominant, phallic ego’s insistence on “not being the mother.” Either way, because the ego is first and foremost a bodily ego, no one wants to be symbolized as a “King Farouk” (i.e., over-indulgent, in excess, ineffectual leader, passive and weak “little girl“, subordinate to a higher power (in Farouk’s case, he was subordinate to the British monarch). These are the psychic roots of not only the establishment of dominant male patriarchy and the weapon welding warriors of the industrial war complex but, according to the Freudian theory of ‘Fort-da‘, the compulsion to repeat, they also find their roots in, and are tied to, acts of sexual sadism, the anal sadistic universe, practices in BDSM, and other forms of sexual deviance like homosexuality as well as personality and psychiatric disorders such as Paranoid Personality Disorder (PPD), anorexia and bulimia (see Chasseguet-Smirgel, 1984).

So first let’s discuss the female psyche with its introjection of the maternal imago. “Femininity, with all its complexities, has been explained by the fact that in this world, woman functions as the deficient “Other” (de Beauvoir, 1952). Monotheism has also reinforced this unconscious hidden hostility toward the mother by praising “God the Father,” thereby obliterating the paternal couple. “Monotheism was praised by Freud, among others, for representing the abstract principle over the concrete. This has been taken, since the establishment of Christianity, as a sign of intellectual and spiritual superiority of Western culture over other cultures. The violence and destructiveness involved in the establishment of this principle have been hidden in the unconscious only to erupt from time to time in unspeakable fits of destructive frenzy (Weiland, 1996).” And herein lies the charlatan act, the lie, the fraud carried out by doctors, scientists and those interested in knowing, and showing, how advancing technological culture can work for the dominant orders by manufacturing a false reality through the compulsion to repeat via manipulations thru advancing modern technological culture (electronic weapons, telemetry, media) and advances in modern medicine (human, inhumane, unethical experiments, biological implants that respond to electromagnetic frequency).

But let us continue our discussion of female development and the female psyche with its introjection of the maternal imago. For the most part, girls do not define themselves in terms of the renunciation of pre-Oedipal relational modes to the extent that boys do, so regression to these modes feel less threatening to women than to men. I say “for the most part” because there are a small group of women who do kill. “Most girls, as a result, remain in a bisexual triangle throughout childhood and puberty — and though they usually make a sexual resolution in favor of men, they retain an internal emotional triangle throughout life (Holmes, 2008).” Except where there is a complete foreclosure on the maternal order and one where the little girl chooses women over men as a sexual partner resulting from the over frustration of the ambivalent breast (see Klein, 1946, Some Notes on Some Schizoid Mechanisms). It is also interesting to note, Chodorow described penis envy as “the symbolic expression of the wish to detach from the mother and become autonomous rather than as a wish to be a man. A daughter does not have the different and desirable penis the son possesses to oppose maternal omnipotence, and she sees the father’s penis as a symbol of independence and separateness [from an otherwise over-controlling phallic] mother.” Chodorow saw Freud’s notion that there is only one genital which people either have or are missing as a way the child defends himself psychologically against the overwhelming importance of its early mother image (Chodorow, 1978). It is here that Kristeva’s comment that “matricide is our vital necessity” can be reinforced because it is seen as a way for the girl child to achieve individuation, autonomy, and dominance against the oppressive psychic forces of maternal omnipotence. It’s a psychic defence against the maternal order. It can be theorized, based on this psychoanalytic information, that most women do not seek a creative perversion to defend against these psychic forces, but that a small percent of women do, and here is where we can begin to discuss diverse outcomes like lesbian homosexuality, personality disorders like PPD, and other psychiatric disorders resulting from a complete foreclosure of the maternal object (anorexia and bulimia).

Secondly, the development of masculine male identity is a little different, but when contemplated upon, you begin to see how the two are connected, and so, how the two share similarities to the same psychic conflict, although, for the most part, the two genders express these conflicts differently. Freud described the little boy’s move away from the mother, in identification with the father, as the beginnings of the ‘Dissolution of the Oedipus Complex.’ “What follows the dissolution of the Oedipus complex is not the establishment of a parental couple but, on the contrary, its destruction. What follows is an idealized/castrating father ruling over a desexualized ego and a repressed maternal world. Ernest Jones, in opposition to Freud, saw the phallic phase as following the Oedipus complex (1927). He maintained that to save his penis the boy gives up mother and substitutes her by his penis. In this reading of the outcome of the Oedipus complex masculine narcissism incorporated in the penis replaces the longing for mother and the accompanying dread of castration. Whichever way we read it; however, the castration complex is central to the outcome of the Oedipus complex (Freud, 1924; Jones, 1927; Weiland, 1996).”

Chodorow on the other hand in ‘Hate, Humiliation, and Masculinity,‘ studies the psychodynamics of violence in modern Western culture. She writes there are two points of diversion in men with regard to how they handle the introjection of mother and this is represented in the separation and loss of mother regarding the little boy’s masculinity. She writes, “The sense of gender in this context comes in only secondarily, at the language of ethnic or religious hatred and is often cast in gendered and sexualized terms (Chodorow, 2012).” That is to say, this supports the notion of an ever-present “cultural hatred” towards women. And here it is interesting to see how the infantile anxieties in dominant male patriarchy, one with access to an advancing technological culture are playing out with regard to a number of cyber violations and this includes the electronically “targeted individual” (TIs) suffering “electronic assaults” (EAs).

With that said, the first fracture in the fragilities and fault lines of masculinity within an advancing technological culture is the paranoid-schizoid splitting that results from felt threats to the self, and humiliation that reacts to narcissistic injury, and these felt threats and humiliations are experienced by humanity in general (see Klein, 1946). National and religious ethnicity of peoplehood are experienced psychodynamically as a “cultural selfhood,” and one where threats to such identities are experienced as threats to the cultural-national self. I’ll come back to this discussion with an explanation of a “technological culture of selfhood” in just a moment, and this applies to both men and women alike. However, it is only a small group of women who carry out masculine defence mechanisms against Objects in their relational world through violent retaliation and physical violence (James Alan Fox, and Emma E. Fridel, 2017). Chodorow writes:

“This first psychic fault line of masculinity involves gender and selfhood in relation to women and femininity. Men’s relationships to women, forged originally in the relationships to the mother, bring up a range of threats to masculinity and the male sense of self — especially fears of dependency, abandonment, and loss of self, as well as an intolerance and fear of women’s sexuality. This negotiation of maleness in relation to the mother — masculinity as developmentally not-female and not subordinate to women — is one component of masculinity [my bold, italics and underline added]. Masculinity, here, has to do, fundamentally, with not being a woman or dependent upon a woman. Freud, Horney, Stoller and many psychoanalytic feminists have shown how the repudiation of women and fears of feminization, beginning with the threat of humiliating inadequacy vis-a-vis the powerful mother, are developmentally fundamental to masculinity and tied to the male sense of self (Freud, 1924; Horney, 1932; Stoller, 1965) …

Because of this developmental context, issues of selfhood as well as of gender tend to differentiate men from women, such that the male’s sense of self may typically be more defensive and in need of protecting its boundaries than the female’s typical sense of self. Masculinity thus defines itself not only as not-femininity and not-mother, in a way that femininity is not cast primarily as not-masculinity or not-father. In addition, seeing the self as not the other, defining the self in opposition to the other, does not seem generally as important to women as to men, nor does merging seem as threatening (see Chodorow, 1978, 1979, 2012).”

Chodorow further writes, “the second psychic fault line of masculinity has to do with the superordinate-subordinate, male-to-male relationship is not reducible to male-to-female. We can find a mythical developmental representation of this dilemma of humiliation and subordination to another man, but it is not Oedipus. (Chodorow, 212).” Here is where I feel she is wrong since a small group of women, like men, employ the same psychic fault line of masculinity thereby allowing for the possibility of male-to-female, female-to-female, and also female-to-male superordinate-to-subordinate object relations. The reason for this failure is attributed to the fact psychoanalysts can’t find a “mythical developmental” representation with which to resolve this dilemma of hate, humiliation, and subordination in terms of male-to-female, female-to-female, female-to-male. Although statistically, we know it occurs (see James Alan Fox, and Emma E. Fridel, 2017). Here Chodorow suggests that if we are interested in myths that capture the inevitable challenges, anxieties, and conflicts of two generations, two genders, power and powerlessness, and desire and its limits, then the story of Persephone in mythical development is more accurate for girls. But in terms of the mythical development to explain male-to-male, superordinate-subordinate object relations it is the “Achilles complex” found in the Iliad by Homer.

In order to capture the intense and driven power in male psychology of male-to-male/superordinate-subordinate conflict, the core development and psychodynamic narrative come from Homer in the Iliad. In this account, Achilles is a junior man, powerless, humiliated, and taunted by Agamemnon, a senior man who already has a wife and children. On a whim, to feed his own narcissism and to humiliate and taunt this challenging young warrior, Agamemnon takes away Achilles’ prize, Briseis, a woman of Achilles’, not of Agamemnon’s generation. In Achilles’ sulking retreat bred of humiliation, Achilles does not care if the entire war is lost. There is a woman involved here, certainly — Briseis (and earlier in the narrative, Agamemnon has sacrificed his daughter Iphigenia, who had been promised to Achilles) — but the attachment to her seems minor compared to Achilles’ passion about the affront dished out to him by Agamemnon.

As the invocation to Achilles would imply, the superordinate-subordinate, male-to-male relationship may particularly underpin terrorism and other male political and ethnic violence. This surely does give us an accurate framing of the psychodynamics of violence in our culture. Another way to formulate this mythical developmental story is to suggest that “the Achilles heel” of men and boys — that is, of both the father’s and the son’s generation — is the fear of narcissistic humiliation by another man, or by other men, and that the currency of this humiliation is often capricious and arbitrary control through war and conquest, or the monopolization, not of the mother, but of younger women who should rightfully belong to the younger man.

In terms of the “technological culture of selfhood“, of which I spoke earlier, in an advancing technological culture, it is technology then that becomes the avenue with which the establishment of a masculine sense of selfhood (identity) is attained. Especially when we think about how “technology has its roots in the use of the object and in object mastery (Weiland, 1996).” The use of the object is, as we know from Winnicott, ruthless and only eventually, with the survival of the mother and with the emergence of externality, will the child develop ‘concern‘ and the ability to ‘make reparation‘. But what if reparation is not possible because the mother has not survived, or even worse because the mother has been murdered (Weiland, 1996)?

Since the “technological culture of selfhood” becomes an integral part of advancing technological culture, and part of a technological culture is Object mastery, technology becomes the avenue with which men seek to vindicate their injured narcissistic ego against the “Achilles complex”. And herein lies the charlatan act, the lie, the fraud carried out by doctors, scientists, and those interested in how advancing technological culture can be employed to work for the dominant order by the mere sleight of hand in manufacturing a false reality through the manipulations of advancing modern technology and advances in modern medicine against the affronted “bad objects.” And here I am speaking of electronically targeted individuals (TIs) and electronic assaults (EAs). And since Western culture, as well as the individual, is interested in how advancing technological culture can be employed to work for their benefit by the mere sleight of hand (creations of illusions based in delusions) we are witnessing the manufacturing of false reality through the manipulations of advancing technology and advances in modern medicine against the affronted “bad objects.” Do we not hear a hint towards Klein’s “bad object”, and now the bad object has become the frustrating ambivalent father whose lack of concern for the son becomes the roots with which we explain the psychodynamics of male-patterned violence? Does this not accurately describe the events of January 6, 2021 when an angry mob of people stormed the US Capitol? And so, too, does this psychodynamic of violence not play out in the female psyche as well?

Chodorow writes:

“On the ground, my own historical reading is that both components of masculinity fuse in the Holocaust and in other genocides, where ethnic cleansing often includes the mass rape of women and the murder of helpless old men and boys, in the sexual humiliation and torture of men as well as women by right-wing dictatorships, and in those Islamic countries that restrict and terrorize women and punish severely those who violate sexual codes. Male sexual terrorism against women and men express ethnic, religious, and state power in reaction to national and ethnic humiliations through gendered and sexual psychic lenses …

We find similar dynamics in homophobia, which is often latent in terrorist ideology and direct in the torture and murder of gays, both in the United States and as we find homosexuality proscribed and brutally punished in other countries. In this context, homosexuality is figured both as submissiveness to other men and as challenging the male-to-female divide, making some men feminine [as I have theorized in the opening with the fear surrounding the symbolic imaginary of the female maternal body]. The particular dynamics that lead to homophobic violence are, of course, complex and varied, but I think it is worth stressing the regressive pull toward and fear of old libidinal and identificatory positions — in the case of men, schematically, to attachment to father and to a terrifying identification or fusion with mother (Chodorow, 2012).”

It is important to say that there is a small category of men who are turned into the submissive Object by their dominant abusive female spouses. Although domestic violence (DV) and intimate partner violence (IPV) are acts carried out primarily by men against women, there are a small number of women who have been labeled “Deadly Women” because of the violence they employ with others. These women abuse their male spouses as well as others, both male or female, who stand in their way.

How the psychodynamics of violence are diffused in acts of sexual deviance

Body expansion, BE and B2E, fantasies are tied to these same roots of hostility toward the maternal/female body. Instead of binding the body with rope, tape, or some other ligature, this form of BDSM binds the body with its own flesh or a flesh substitute which is usually represented as a rubber inflatable suit (Gates, 2000). These psychic fantasies, when primarily used against females, may hint towards the complexity surrounding the introjection of mother and the absence of a normal Oedipal growth pattern, lacking a gradual working through of the loss and separation of mother that Kristeva speaks of and which I referenced early in this paper (Kristeva, 1989). We can certainly make a connection here to Winnicott’s theory (1971) on object mastery:

“At this point of development that is under survey the subject is creating the object in the sense of finding externality itself, and it has to be added that this experience depends on the object’s capacity to survive.” (It is important that ‘survive’, in this context, means ‘not retaliate’.)

The maternal body introjected into the psyche when a sudden, violent, traumatic rupture occurs can develop into Freud’s Ego Ideal, that is, the narcissistic idealization of the paternal image born of the powerful father in the exaltation of the psychic murder of the mother. Weiland writes:

“Irigaray describes Clytemnestra’s murder as the archaic murder of the mother that established the right of the father. Aeschylus’ trilogy, The Oresteia, portrays the murder of Agamemnon by his wife Clytemnestra and, subsequently, the murder of Clytemnestra, together with her lover Aegisthus, by their son Orestes. After the murder Orestes is persecuted by the Furies, maternal goddesses that seek revenge for the murder of the mother, and by Clytemnestra’s ghost. Exhausted he arrives in Athens and takes refuge in Athena’s temple. In the final part of the Oresteia Orestes is tried by the Athenian High Court presided over by Athena, with Apollo taking Orestes’ defence. In this trial Apollo argues that the murder of Agamemnon by Clytemnestra is a bigger crime than the murder of Clytemnestra by her son Orestes because the child does not belong to mother but to father. Orestes’ duty was, therefore, to avenge his father’s death by murdering his mother. In Athena’s casting vote that declares Orestes innocent we have the final dictum that the child belongs to father, not to mother, and in Apollo’s passionate defence of Orestes we have the birth of the paternal superego. The paternal principle having thus been established, Orestes is exonerated and the Furies are rendered harmless — they are indeed invited to make Athens their residence and are offered a cavern on the Acropolis” (Weiland, 1996).

Weiland further writes:

Technology is, of course, linked to the use of the object. As such it partakes in the struggle for the establishment of externality and involves attacks on the object, as well as the search for an object which, unlike the murdered mother, would survive the attacks. To the extent to which concern has not been established technology is ruthless. To the extent to which externality has not been established technology is a narcissistic extension of the self that relates more to faeces than to baby” (Weiland, 1996).

So, the introjection of mother as the “bad object” is a predominant theme that holds true for both little boys and little girls. But what happens when an adult bisexual female Object who, forced through electromagnetic frequency assaults and manipulations, that is clandestine, surreptitious electronic assaults and electronic attacks against the body via an electromagnetic tether is made to give up her paternal superego defence; active workouts and weight lifting which act as a psychic defence AGAINST her internalized maternal bad object, and instead is abused through forced sedation/stimulation via an electromagnetic tether? Do we not have an unknown dominant phallic ego abusing a female bisexual subordinate Object into further subordination through the “silencing and muting her sexuality” (Walker, 1998)? We can read the silence to this act of matricidal destruction by its projection onto the hated Object the repudiated cultural symbolic of the maternal body. Through electromagnetic manipulations, the “bad object” is destroyed and replaced with the repudiated cultural symbolic of the maternal body. This is exactly the matricidal destructiveness born out of infantile anxieties in an age of advancing technological culture! Let me reiterate, since the “technological culture of selfhood” becomes an integral part of advancing technological cultural, and part of a technological culture is Object mastery, technology becomes the avenue with which men (and women) seek to vindicate their injured narcissistic egos against the “Achilles complex”. And herein lies the charlatan act, the lie, the fraud carried out by doctors, scientists, and those interested in how advancing technological culture can be used to work for the dominant order by the mere sleight of hand in manufacturing a false reality through the manipulations of reality using advances in modern technology and advances in modern medicine against the affronted bad objects. And since Western culture, as well as the individual, is interested in how advancing technological culture can be employed to work for their benefit by the mere sleight of hand creating an illusion based in a delusion, the manufacturing of a false reality through advances in modern technological culture and medicine becomes the narcissistic ego’s solution in defence against their affronted bad objects. This is how the masculine ego shores up its wounded identity when there has been a psychical defeat. Do we not see Western cultures “Fort-da”; its compulsion to repeat by creating an illusion based in a delusion? Do we not hear a hint toward Klein’s “bad breast/object“, except the bad object can be worked out as belonging to both the frustrating ambivalent breast of the mother with a lack of concern for the infant and the frustrating ambivalent father whose lack of concern for the son becomes the roots with which we explain the psychodynamics of male-patterned violence? Were these not what the Witch Trials were all about (Hill, 1995)? The Oresteian myth stands, next to the Oedipus myth, as does Homer’s Iliad with its “Achilles complex” as central Greek myths that express both a psychical and a cultural problem. They both can be used as tools to explain the psychodynamics of violence for both men and women because both men and women are raised by two gendered Objectsone paternal and one maternalThey, therefore, introject both objects in a variety of diverse way but always in some meaningful way, and since The Oresteia portrays vividly the violent event that brings about the death of the early powerful mother as well as the need for defence against the internal persecutors that such an attack on mother produces we can use them side-by-side along with the “Achilles complex” to help explain Western cultures phenomenon of violence and the electronically targeted individual.

Manufacturing the Monster

Weiland is most certainly correct to compare modern advancing technology to Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein as it portrays phallic omnipotence in the manufacturing of a monster in the image of the self. The manufacturing of a monster with an observable lack of concern for those involved. Like technology, Frankenstein’s monster was not a monster to start, but as the monster absorbs the projections of those with whom he is confronted he evolves. Technology, like Frankenstein’s monster, has become “the thing” that cannot feel empathy, concern, or pity for those that use it. Like money, it has become a vehicle for which men assuage their fears and mount their hopes for the future, for something better. Hopefully a better life. But like Dr. Frankenstein, technology cannot fill the empty void; the fracture in the soul of man. It becomes the band-aid for a wound that is too deep to fix without the work of mourning.

While writing this paper, the events in U.S. News on January 5 and January 6, 2021, transpired. First, on January 5, some unknown person hacked a “secure” radio frequency and several New York air traffic controllers heard an automated message “We are going to fly a plane into the Capitol on Wednesday. Soleimani’s death will be avenged.” Then on January 6, a large group of protesters dressed like Trump supports stormed the US Capitol, breaking through barricades, smashing the Capitol’s windows, and mounting a revolt inside the state complex against the election of Joe Biden. I like to quote Adrienne Harris:

“Whether as a bludgeoning force or a subtle glance, “History comes to us,’ in the neo liberal state, as in the totalitarian. Intimacy is the contradictory site of freedom and regulation. Intimate life, particularly the intimate life of the body, of gendered experience, and of sexuality, however delicate, sensually rich, secretive, archaic, or primitive, is always already infused by regulation, by violence, and by power (Harris; 2017).”

Harris’ said one of her tasks in writing ‘Intimacy: The tank in the bedroom‘ was to speak about intimacies’ ties to and dependency on social and historic forces. I see it as my task to talk about the manufacturing of ‘monsters’ through the very same forces and the last four years of US politics and news seemed to be focused on just that, manufacturing the ‘monster’. For one might say, that like Shelley’s Frankenstein, the monster that stormed the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, was a projection of Donald Trump’s own creation. And what further complicates these manipulations by political leaders are the actions by other players, who, with the interest to further manipulate the press, employ tactics known as ‘spin’. I believe this is what Russia-Gate was about in the Facebook conspiracy that sought to create ‘spin’ surrounding a US president and a Russian leader. This tactic allowed for ‘kick-back’ to be analyzed. These manipulations further exacerbate the problem that creates distortions, delusions, and illusions. Much like the manipulations of reality through the use of advancing technology and advancing medical technology to create a false reality with regard to the Targeted Individual (TIs) suffering electronic assaults (EAs). These actions are the result of matricidal drives which display a lack of ‘concern‘ and ‘reparation‘ toward objects which are hidden unanalyzed, unconscious fantasy in the psyche of men because there has been no working through mourning the loss and separation and rupture with the mother (see Winnicott, 1971, Playing and Reality). And because the act of targeting certain individuals with electronic assault is part of “manufacturing the enemy“, (i.e., manufacturing ‘the monster‘) that is based on the sleight hand of an illusionist creating a mythical evil rooted indifference, we can understand these events for what they represent. The manufacturing of ‘Evil’.

______________________________________________________________

Sources:

Balsam, Rosemary. (2012). Women’s Bodies in Psychoanalysis. East Essex, Canada. Routledge.

Benvenuto, Bice and Kennedy, Roger. “Psychosis” in The Works of Jacques Lacan: An Introduction. London. Free Associated Books. (1986).

Butler, Judith. (1997). The Psychic Life of Power: Theories in Subjection. Stanford, CA. Stanford University Press.

Chasseguet-Smirgel, Janine. (1984). Creativity and Perversion. London. Free Association Books.

Chodorow, Nancy J. (1978). The Reproduction of Mothering: Psychoanalysis and the Sociology of Gender. Berkeley. University of California Press.

Chodorow, Nancy J. (1979). Gender, relation and difference in psychoanalytic perspective. In Feminism and psychoanalytic theory. (pp. 99–113). New Haven, CT. Yale University Press, 1989.

Chodorow, Nancy J. (2012). Individualizing Gender and Sexuality: Theory and Practice. Part of the Relational Perspective Book Series, Volume 53. New York. Routledge: Taylor & Francis. pp. 121–136.

de Beauvoir, Simone. (1952). The Second Sex. New York. Alfred A. Knopf.

Fox, James Alan and Fridel Phd., Emma E. ‘Gender Differences in Patterns and Trends in U.S. Homicide, 1976–2015′. Violence and Gender. Vol. 4, №2. June 1 2017.

Freud, Sigmund. (1905). “Three essays on the theory of sexuality.” Standard Edition, Volume 7. London. Hogarth Press.

Freud, Sigmund. (1920) Beyond the Pleasure Principle. Translation by J. Strachey. London. W.W. Norton, 1961.

Freud, Sigmund. (1924). “The dissolution of the Oedipus complex.” Standard Edition. Volume 19. London. Hogarth Press.

Freud, Sigmund. (1925). “Some psychical consequences of the anatomical distinction between the sexes.” Standard Edition, Volume 19. London. Hogarth Press.

Freud, Sigmund. (1931). “Female Sexuality.” Standard Edition, Volume 21. London. Hogarth Press.

Freud, Sigmund (1932). “Femininity.” Standard Edition, Volume 22. London. Hogarth Press.

Gates, Katherine. (2000). Deviant Desires: Incredibly strange sex. New York. Juno Books.

Harris, Adrienne. ‘Intimacy: The tank in the bedroom.’ The International Journal of Psychoanalysis. Volume 98, Issue 3, June 2017. pp 585–960.

Hill, Frances. (1995). A Delusion of Satan: The full story of the Salem Witch Trials. Cambridge, MA. Da Capo Press.

Holmes, Lucy. (2008). The Internal Triangle: New Theories of Female Development. New York. Jason Aronson.

Holmes, Lucy. (2013). Wrestling with Destiny: The promise of psychoanalysis. New York. Routledge.

Horney, Karen. (1932). The dread of woman. In Feminine psychology (pp. 133–146). New York. Norton, 1967.

Jacobs, Amber. (2007). On Matricide: Myth, Psychoanalysis, and the Law of the Mother. New York. Columbia University Press.

Jones, E. (1927). The early development of female sexuality. In Papers on Psychoanalysis. London. Maresfield Reprints.

Klein, Melanie. (1946). ‘Some Notes on Some Schizoid Mechanisms’. In Envy and Gratitude and Other Works: 1946–1963. London. Virago, 1988. Retrieved online January 7, 2021. https://tcf-website-media-library.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/25114704/Klein-M-1946-Notes-on-Some-Schizoid-Mechanisms.-In-Envy-and-Gratitude-and-Other-Works.-Delta-Books-1975.pdf

Klien, Melanie. Envy and Gratitude and Other Works: 1946–1963. London. Virago, 1988.

Klein, Melanie. (1959) Our adult world and its roots in infancy. In The Writings of Melanie Klein, Vol. III. London: Hogarth Press, 1984.

Klein, Melanie and Riviera, J. (1964). Love, Hate, and Reparation. New York. W.W. Norton.

Klein, Melanie. The Psychoanalysis of Children. London. Vintage, 1997.

Knafo, Danielle and Feiner, Kenneth. (2006). Unconscious Fantasies and the Relational World. Part of the Relational Perspective Book Series, Volume 31. Hillside, NJ. The Analytic Press, Inc.

Kristeva, Julia. ‘Stabat Mater’, translation by Arthur Goldhammer in The Female Body in Western Culture: Contemporary Perspectives, Susan Rubin Suleiman ed. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1986, pp. 99–118). Also in Tales of Love translation by Leon S. Roudiez (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987, pp. 234–63). Originally published as Histoires d’amour (Paris: Denoel, 1983). “Stabat Mater” first published in Herethique de l’amour”, Tel Quel 74 (Winter) 1977.

Kristeva, Julia. (1989). Black Sun. New York. Columbia University Press.

Main, Mary. (1995). “Attachment: Overview, with implications for clinical work.” In S. Goldberg, R. Muir, & J. Kerr (Ed’s.), Attachment theory: Social, development and clinical perspective (pp. 407–474). Hillsdale, NJ. Analytic Press.

Mitchell, Juliette. (2000). Madmen and Medusa’s: Reclaiming hysteria. New York. Basic Books.

Perper, Joshua A. and Cina, Stephen J. (2010). When Doctors Kill: Who, Why, and How. New York. Copernicus Books. The authors wrote the following quotation for the opening of their book and its reference to “God” in a nod to the scientist and medical doctor but not in a good sense: “I am God, your Physician” (Ex. 15:26). The prophets also acknowledge God as a Healer and Jeremiah stated: “Heal us, and we will be healed” (from the blessing for healing, Jeremiah 17:14). Throughout the Torah, God is imbued with great healing powers. It is no wonder that it is written, “The Lord giveth, the Lord taketh away” when it comes to health, wealth, and life itself.”

Stoller, R. (1965). The sense of maleness. In Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 34, 207–218.

The United States Attorney’s Bulletin. U.S. Department of Justice. Cyber Misbehavior. Vol. 64, №3, May 2016. Retrieved online January 6, 2021. https://www.justice.gov/usao/file/851856/download

Van Brunt, Brian, Amy Murphy, Lisa Pescara-Kovach, and Gina-Lyn Crance. ‘Early Identification of Grooming and Targeting in Predatory Sexual Behavior on College Campuses.’ Vol. 6, №1. Violence and Gender. March 2019.

Walker, Michelle Boulous. (1998) Philosophy and the Maternal Body: Reading silence. New York. Routledge.

Wallin, David J. (2007). Attachment in Psychotherapy. New York. The Guilford Press.

Weiland, Christina. (1996). ‘Matricide and Destructiveness: Infantile Anxieties and Technological Culture.’ British Journal of Psychotherapy 12, №3; 300–313.

Winnicott, D.W. (1971). “The use of the Object and relating through identifications.” In Playing and Reality. Harmondsworth. Penguin, 1980.

Wolf, Naomi. (2002). The Beauty Myth. New York. Harper Collins.

WRITTEN BYKaren Barna

Mother, Daughter, Gardener, Student, Graduate, Cook, Care-Giver, Lover of Books, Reader of Philosophy, Interested in Psychoanalysis

Matricidal Destructiveness and Infantile Anxieties in an Age of Advancing Technological Culture (Final Draft Version)

King Farouk of Egypt in foreign exile after he was thrown out of power in 1952.  

by Karen Barna  

I cannot even begin to think of a better quotation to open this discussion than from the film “Angels and Demons” when the killer said to Tom Hanks and the female physicist he was with, in the Vatican, that he wasn’t paid to kill them, and so, was going to let them live but if they chose to follow him, well, then that was a different story. He issued the following warning to them before he left:  

“Be careful. These are men of God.”  

King Farouk of Egypt came to symbolize over-indulgence, in excess, corruption, in-effective weak governance, and kleptocracy as he was perceived as stripe mining the nation’s wealth and leaving the Egyptian people poorer.  

In symbolism, his body image is associated with the female pregnant body. Lucy Holmes wrote, “Childbirth is woman’s talisman, manifest and indisputable evidence of female power. The ability to create new life is the earliest and most profound source of power, and we all, men and women, fear it.” (Holmes; 2013) This fear is born out of the paternal superego based in defence protection because the idealization of the father and of the masculine. It has its origins in the defence against the omnipotent bad mother – omnipotent because she is needed, omnipotent because she is desired, omnipotent because she is identified with, omnipotent because she is hated, omnipotent because she is seen to have murdered the father. (Weiland; 1996)  

Nancy J. Chodorow and Adrienne Harris wrote in the foreword of Rosemary Balsam’s work “Women’s Bodies in Psychoanalysis“:  

“We are all too familiar with the fear and accompanying degradation of women, the concern with bigness and expansiveness, the anxious unsettledness in cultural and psychoanalytic reactions to female flesh. By contrast, it has been a hallmark of writing about male oedipal development to think of the pleasures of bigness, the delight (and fear) in the boy’s links to power and expansiveness. Balsam asks us to question how these processes get reversed when it comes to the maternal body?” (Balsam, 2012).   

In my opinion, because the superego is a paternal superego the female pregnant body represents the void; laziness, weakness, lack of discipline, oppression and subordination, and passivity as its constitution even though it symbolizes the power of female fertility and the power of femininity it is not perceived in this light because of the idealization of father. In fact, the maternal symbolic order is a far cry from the talisman of male phallic symbolism. A symbol which has been historically represented to display the power of male fertility and the phallus or King was the shape of an obelisk. Long, lithe phallic power that resembles a penis. We can find modern cultural examples of proclivity towards the male symbolic in the fashion industry. All one has to do is look at the runway model.   

In psychoanalysis, we understand the introjection of the female pregnant body as the symbolic for maternity and its healthy introjection allows for little girl the ability to embrace her power and be open to motherhood. We use the perspectives of Sigmund Freud’s Oedipus to explain the little boy moves away from the mother and toward identification with the father’s penis which is a symbol of active, dominant, warrior, protector, and self-disciplined (Freud, 1924). But this move away from mother happens with little girl’s as well especially through ambivalent attachment or what is known as the ambivalent breast. The ambivalent breast is characterized as a breast that is frustrating and if the ambivalent breast surpasses the frustration tolerance of the infant then a sudden violent, traumatic rupture with mother is theorized to occur (Jacobs, 2007; Klein, 1946). Female attacks on female body permeate modern culture. Anorexia nervosa, bulimia, cosmetic plastic surgery; breasts enlargements, breasts reduction, noses, thighs and bellies are modified to achieve some ideal of beauty. “The concept of “beauty” lives deep in the psyche, where sexuality mingles with self-esteem. Fashion insists that beauty can be bestowed from the outside. It is essentially visual; all the other senses, smell, taste, touch and sound, that make a woman erotic, are effectively cancelled out … What is deeply, essentially feminine – the life in a woman’s expression, the feel of her flesh, the transformations of childbirth and menopause, are reclassified as ugly or diseased. Fat and aging are transformed into conditions that must be altered by beauty products [and by advances in technology] (Wolf, 2002; Holmes, 2013).” But the attacks don’t just stop at the plastic surgeon’s office. Attacks against the female body have been pervasive throughout modern Western culture which will be described in the section on femininities and masculinities, and attacks have been carried out by both men and women alike. The weaponizing of technology in the form of electronic radio frequency assaults, remotes that control biological implants, the use of cell phone technology, global positioning systems, and the advent of electronic weapons of war has opened the door for a new age of matricidal destructiveness and war on crime. Through what Freud called the Electra complex and penis envy little girls can also experience a sudden violent, traumatic rupture/loss and separation from the mother as well due to this ambivalence and hints to this matricidal destructiveness can be seen in the disorders of anorexia and bulimia (Freud, 1905; Freud, 1925; Freud, 1931; Freud, 1932). As a result, some little girls strongly identify with their fathers and if the rupture against the mother is a complete foreclosure, homosexuality (lesbianism) can develop or a disturbed personality in paranoid fear of castrating, not only maternal Objects but also paternal Objects, in the little girl’s object relational world (Jacobs, 2007; Klein, 1946; Klein, 1964). It is for this reason personality disorders are closely studied alongside sexual orientation and gender issues. 

Julia Kristeva felt the separation from the mother was such a complex issue that if separation didn’t happen in the correct way abnormal psychological development could ensue. Kristeva felt matricide is our psychic necessity if individuation is to occur in the establishment of our own unique identities (Kristeva, 1989). Lacan believed the violent rupture from the maternal order is necessary for the establishment of the symbolic order or patriarchy. This may be true if we are speaking in terms of the “traditional” symbolic order of feminine and masculine, but as you know there are peculiarities to consider, anomalies that do not fit “traditional” gender relations or “normal” personality growth.  

Julia Kristeva wrote poetically when she wrote in her work ‘Stabat Mater’ the following:  

“For more than a century now, our culture has faced the urgent need to reformulate its representations of and hate, inherited from Plato’s Symposium, the troubadours, and Our Lady, in order to deal with the relationship of one woman to another. Here again, maternity points the way to a possible solution: a woman rarely, I do not say never, experiences passion – love or hate – for another woman, without at some point taking the place of her own mother – without becoming a mother herself and, even more importantly, without undergoing the lengthy process of learning to differentiate herself from her daughter, her simulacrum, whose presence she is forced to confront (Walker, 1998).”  

What is missing from Freudian analysis and ‘Dissolution of the Oedipus Complex‘ is the possibility that some individuals do not experience a violent rupture, they experience a gradual working through of the loss and separation from a mother who makes them feel secure which can be explained by attachment theory (Wallin, 2007; Main, 1995; Klein, 1959). The violent rupture seems to occur as a result of the ambivalent breast and not a result of secure attachment. As a result, depending on the specifics of each individual’s development, the rise of unique psychic growth patterns due to a diversity of maternal psychic conflicts and/or foreclosures occur thus creating troubled personalities first observed by Freud and known as ‘Fort-da’ or the compulsion to repeat and the child’s use of objects as mastery over his/her reality (Freud, 1920; Benvenuto and Kennedy, 1986; Knafo and Feiner, 2006; Weiland, 1996, Winnicott, 1971). Juliette Mitchell described in her work, Madmen and Medusas: Reclaiming hysteria, that attachment can be undone through the onset of difficult and frustrating environments as we have seen in such cases of the side-effects of war, and so, we can see how trauma can effect a person’s attachment, undoing or disturbing it through manipulative, destructive, infantile acts that inflict trauma in the minds of an Object by a “Master“, and is observed in cases utilizing modern advanced technological culture (i.e., electronic weapons, cyber misbehavior, and global positioning systems, etc.) to manufacture a particular reality (Mitchell, 2000; The United States Attorney’s Bulletin, U.S. Department of Justice, May 2016).  

“Subjection is defined as the act or fact of being subjected, as under a monarch or other sovereign or superior power; the state of being subject to, or under the dominion of another; hence general subordination.” ~Oxford English Dictionary

In the case of one Targeted Individual (TIs) the simultaneous use of cell phone/computer blocking technology to frustrate the Object, and then, at the same time deliver electro convulsive shock therapy to sedate the frustrated Object is on par with the Nazi Holocaust medical experiments. The Operator/Controller (i.e., the “Master“) is the Dr. Mendel of Jewish extermination practices! (Perper and Cina; 2010). In addition, regarding this one particular case of a Targeted Individual, receiving unexpected, unannounced, and un-consented electronic assaults to her body in the middle of the night was part of the torture and abuse. At approximately 3:45 AM in the morning, the victim is reported as being awakened by the turning on of an electromagnetic field (RF) and then receiving electro-convulsive shock stimulation to the brain. These are but only two accounts of the torture and abuse the victim has received at the hands of some unknown assailant (Butler, 1997). We can make a comparison between Targeted Individuals suffering electronic assaults with the grooming and targeting practices used by sexual predators on college campuses. One facet of sexual predation on college campuses is the expressed behavior by those individuals interested in preying on others to meet their own sexual needs and/or exert a sense of power and control through sexual assault and rape. Predators use coercion and grooming behaviors to lower the defenses of the target and increase their vulnerability to sexual violence. Predators seek to lessen a victim’s ability to advocate for personal safety and disempower them from bringing concerns forward to authorities. These behaviors also occur in social settings where the targets are softened through environmental factors such as unrestricted access to mass quantities of alcohol, parties with limited exits or lacking quiet, safe places to check in with supportive friends, and the saturation of misogynistic or sexually charged posters, music, or visual displays (Van Brunt, Murphy, Pescara-Kovach, and Crance, 2019). One of aspects to one individual’s account of targeting through electronic assault was the ability, through remote radio frequency control, to lower the conscious awareness of the individual in lieu of alcohol or sedating drugs. This capability opened up access to the victim so that the predator(s) could victimized the target. It also allowed analyst to point to Winnicott’s theory (1971) that an important aspect of object relations was the survival of the object, and by survival we mean the object doesn’t retaliate.   

It is important that we realize the internal struggle of men exist on both an individual level as well as a cultural level. So, I want to include a passage from Christina Weiland’s paper, ‘Matricide and Destructiveness: Infantile Anxieties and Technological Culture‘ which was published in the British Journal of Psychology in 1996:  

“It is a truism to say that all our patients are engaged in an internal struggle with their objects, especially the mother. This struggle, hidden for some, open for others, seems to underlie the human condition. In this sense it constitutes a fundamental human problem – the solution to which is both an individual and a cultural one. This fundamental human condition has to do with an inadequate separation from the maternal object and the need to separate and individuate. Culture, as a space where the working through of fundamental human problems takes place, constitutes a container; culture, as an ideal and a prohibition, constitutes part of the superego. For the individual the solution to any particular psychic problem will depend on both his/her object relations as well as the cultural space. So, when I refer to matricide I do so on both levels – the individual and the cultural (Weiland, 1996).”   

The Differences Between the Genders Regarding the Introjection of the Mother  

At this point in the paper, I would like to discuss the psychic fear of becoming the “maternal imago” both in the female psyche (Holmes, 2008; Balsam, 2012) and the male psyche (Freud, 1924; Chodorow, 2012). How the female pregnant body can be perceived as “humiliating” because it represents effectual leadership/governance, over-indulgence, subordination to a higher power, oppressed, weak, diseased, undisciplined, and the “feminine” little girl who lacks a penis. For women who have incorporated a paternal superego void of a positive female pregnant body experience will, in all likelihood, reject maternity and repudiate motherhood for the repressive, humiliating symbol it represents to her ego (Balsam, 1986; Walker, 1998; Holmes, 2013; Kristeva; 1977). And how so, too, the overweight, fat, in effectual male paternal body can be used, at least in an imaginary sense, to fill this same symbolic mythical imaginary as the “weak little girl“. Something we will come to realize as one of the fault lines and fragilities of man’s narcissistic ego in the formation of the ego Ideal; that is, modern, dominant, phallic ego’s insistence on “not being the mother.” Either way, because the ego is first and foremost a bodily ego, no one wants to be symbolized as a “King Farouk” (i.e., over-indulgent, in excess, in effectual leader, passive and weak “little girl“, subordinate to a higher power (in Farouk’s case, he was subordinate to the British monarch). These are the psychic roots of not only the establishment of dominant male patriarchy and the weapon welding warriors of the Industrial War Complex but, according to Freud through his theory of ‘Fort-da‘, the compulsion to repeat, they also find their roots in, and are tied to, acts of sexual sadism, the anal sadistic universe, practices in BDSM, and other forms of sexual deviance like homosexuality as well as personality and psychiatric disorders such as Paranoid Personality Disorder (PPD), anorexia and bulimia (Chasseguet-Smirgel, 1984).    

So first let’s discuss the female psyche with its introjection of the maternal imago. “Femininity, with all its complexities, has been explained by the fact that in this world, woman functions as the deficient “Other” (de Beauvoir, 1952). Monotheism has also reinforced this unconscious hidden hostility toward the mother by praising “God the Father,” thereby obliterating the paternal couple. “Monotheism was praised by Freud, among others, for representing the abstract principle over the concrete. This has been taken, since the establishment of Christianity, as a sign of intellectual and spiritual superiority of Western culture over other cultures. The violence and destructiveness involved in the establishment of this principle have been hidden in the unconscious only to erupt from time to time in unspeakable fits of destructive frenzy (Weiland, 1996).” And here in lies the charlatan act, the lie, the fraud carried out by doctors, scientists and those interested in knowing, and showing, how advancing technological culture can work for the dominant orders by manufacturing a false reality through the compulsion to repeat via manipulations thru advancing modern technological culture (electronic weapons, telemetry, media) and advances in modern medicine (human, inhumane, unethical experiments).   

But let us continue our discussion of female development and the female psyche with its introjection of the maternal imago. For the most part, girls do not define themselves in terms of the renunciation of pre-Oedipal relational modes to the extent that boys do, so regression to these modes feel less threatening to women than to men. I say “for the most part” because there are a small group of women who kill. “Most girl’s, as a result, remain in a bisexual triangle throughout childhood and puberty – and though they usually make a sexual resolution in favor of men, they retain an internal emotional triangle throughout life (Holmes, 2008).” Except where there is a complete foreclosure on the maternal order and one where the little girl chooses women over men as a sexual partner resulting from the over frustration of the ambivalent breast (Klein, 1946-1963). It is also interesting to note, Chodorow described penis envy as “the symbolic expression of the wish to detach from the mother and become autonomous rather than as a wish to be a man. A daughter does not have the different and desirable penis the son possesses to oppose maternal omnipotence, and she sees the father’s penis as a symbol of independence and separateness [from an otherwise over controlling phallic] mother.” Chodorow saw Freud’s notion that there is only one genital which people either have or are missing as a way the child defends himself psychologically against the overwhelming importance of its early mother image (Chodorow, 1978). It is here that Kristeva’s comment that “matricide is our vital necessity” can be reinforced because it is seen as a way for the girl child to achieve individuation, autonomy, and dominance against the oppressive psychic forces of maternal omnipotence. It’s a psychic defence against the maternal order. It can be theorized, based on this psychoanalytic information, that most women do not seek a creative perversion to defend against these psychic forces, but that a small percent of women do, and here is where we can begin to discuss diverse outcomes like lesbian homosexuality, personality disorders like PPD, and other psychiatric disorders resulting from a complete foreclosure of the maternal object (anorexia and bulimia).    

Secondly, the development of masculine male identity is a little different, but when contemplated upon, you begin to see how the two are connected, and so, how the two share similarities to the same psychic conflict, although, for the most part, the two genders express these conflicts differently. Freud described the little boy’s move away from the mother, in identification with the father, as the beginnings of the ‘Dissolution of the Oedipus Complex.’ “What follows the dissolution of the Oedipus complex is not the establishment of a parental couple but, on the contrary, its destruction. What follows is an idealized/castrating father ruling over a desexualized ego and a repressed maternal world. Ernest Jones, in opposition to Freud, saw the phallic phase as following the Oedipus complex (1927). He maintained that to save his penis the boy gives up mother and substitutes her by his penis. In this reading of the outcome of the Oedipus complex masculine narcissism incorporated in the penis replaces the longing for mother and the accompanying dread of castration. Whichever way we read it; however, the castration complex is central to the outcome of the Oedipus complex (Freud, 1924; Jones, 1927; Weiland, 1996).”     

Chodorow on the other hand in ‘Hate, Humiliation, and Masculinity,‘ studies the psychodynamics of violence in modern Western culture. She writes there are two points of diversion in men with regard to how they handle the introjection of mother and this is represented in the separation and loss of mother regarding the little boy’s masculinity. She writes, “The sense of gender in this context comes in only secondarily, at the language of ethnic or religious hatred and is often cast in gendered and sexualized terms (Chodorow, 2012).” That is to say, this supports the notion of a ever present “cultural hatred” towards women. And here it is interesting to see how the infantile anxieties in a dominant male patriarchy, one with access to an advancing technological culture is playing out with regard to a number of cyber violations and this includes the electronically “targeted individual” (TIs) suffering “electronic assaults” (EAs).    

With that said, the first fracture in the fragilities and fault lines of masculinity within an advancing technological culture is the paranoid-schizoid splitting that results from felt threats to the self, and humiliation that reacts to narcissistic injury, and these felt threats and humiliations are experience by humanity in general (see Klein, 1946). National and religious ethnicity of peoplehood are experienced psychodynamically as a “cultural selfhood,” and one where threats to such identities are experienced as threats to the cultural-national self. I’ll come back to this discussion with an explanation of a “technological culture of selfhood” in just a moment, and this applies to both men and women alike. However, it is only a small group of women who carry out masculine defence mechanisms against Objects in their relational world through violent retaliation and physical violence (James Alan Fox, and Emma E. Fridel, 2017). Chodorow writes:   

“This first psychic fault line of masculinity involves gender and selfhood in relation to women and femininity. Men’s relationships to women, forged originally in the relationships to the mother, bring up a range of threats to masculinity and the male sense of self – especially fears of dependency, abandonment, and loss of self, as well as an intolerance and fear of women’s sexuality. This negotiation of maleness in relation to the mother – masculinity as developmentally not-female and not subordinate to women – is one component of masculinity [my bold, italics and underline added]. Masculinity, here, has to do, fundamentally, with not being a woman or dependent upon a woman. Freud, Horney, Stoller and many psychoanalytic feminists have shown how the repudiation of women and fears of feminization, beginning with the threat of humiliating inadequacy vis-a-vis the powerful mother, are developmentally fundamental to masculinity and tied to the male sense of self (Freud, 1924; Horney, 1932; Stoller, 1965)  …  

Because of this developmental context, issues of selfhood as well as of gender tend to differentiate men from women, such that the male’s sense of self may typically be more defensive and in need of protecting its boundaries than the female’s typical sense of self. Masculinity thus defines itself not only as not-femininity and not-mother, in a way that femininity is not cast primarily as not-masculinity or not-father. In addition, seeing the self as not the other, defining the self in opposition to the other, does not seem generally as important to women as to men, nor does merging seem as threatening (see Chodorow, 1978, 1979, 2012).”   

Chodorow further writes, “the second psychic fault line of masculinity has to do with the superordinate-subordinate, male-to-male relationship is not reducible to male-to-female. We can find mythical developmental representation of this dilemma of humiliation and subordination to another man, but it is not Oedipus. (Chodorow, 212).” Here is where I feel she is wrong since a small group of women, like men, employ the same psychic fault line of masculinity thereby allowing for the possibility of male-to-female, female-to-female and also female-to-male superordinate-to-subordinate object relations. The reason for this failure is attributed to the fact psychoanalysts can’t find a “mythical developmental” representation with which to resolve this dilemma of hate, humiliation and subordination in terms of male-to-female, female-to-female, female-to-male. Although statistically, we know it occurs (see James Alan Fox, and Emma E. Fridel, 2017). Here Chodorow suggests that if we are interested in myths that capture the inevitable challenges, anxieties, and conflicts of two generations, two genders, power and powerlessness, and desire and its limits, then the story of Persephone in mythical development is more accurate for girls. But in terms of the mythical development to explain male-to-male, superordinate-subordinate object relations it is the “Achilles complex” found in the Iliad by Homer.    

In order to capture the intense and driven power in male psychology of male-to-male/superordinate-subordinate conflict, the core development and psychodynamic narrative comes from Homer in the Iliad. In this account, Achilles is a junior man, powerless, humiliated, and taunted by Agamemnon, a senior man who already has a wife and children. On a whim, to feed his own narcissism and to humiliate and taunt this challenging young warrior, Agamemnon takes away Achilles’ prize, Briseis, a woman of Achilles’, not of Agamemnon’s generation. In Achilles’ sulking retreat bred of humiliation, Achilles does not care if the entire war is lost. There is a woman involved here, certainly – Briseis (and earlier in the narrative, Agamemnon has scarified his daughter Iphigenia, who had been promised to Achilles) – but the attachment to her seems minor compared to Achilles’ passion about the affront dished out to him by Agamemnon.   

As the invocation to Achilles would imply, the superordinate-subordinate male-to-male relationship may particularly underpin terrorism and other male political and ethnic violence. This surely does give us an accurate framing of the psychodynamics of violence in our culture. Another way to formulate this mythical developmental story is to suggest that “the Achilles heel” of men and boys – that is, of both the father’s and the son’s generation – is the fear of narcissistic humiliation by another man, or by other men, and that the currency of this humiliation is often capricious and arbitrary control through war and conquest, or the monopolization, not of the mother, but of younger women who should rightfully belong to the younger man.   

In terms of the “technological culture of selfhood“, of which I spoke earlier, in an advancing technological culture, it is technology then that becomes the avenue with which the establishment of a masculine sense of selfhood (identity) is attained. Especially when we think about how “technology has its roots in the use of the object and in object mastery (Weiland, 1996).” The use of the object is, as we know from Winnicott, ruthless and only eventually, with the survival of the mother and with the emergence of externality, will the child develop ‘concern‘ and the ability to ‘make reparation‘. But what if reparation is not possible because the mother has not survived, or even worse because the mother has been murdered (Weiland, 1996)?   

Since the “technological culture of selfhood” becomes an integral part of advancing technological cultural, and part of technological culture is Object mastery, technology becomes the avenue with which men seek to vindicate their injured narcissistic ego against the “Achilles complex”. And here in lies the charlatan act, the lie, the fraud carried out by doctors, scientists and those interested in how advancing technological culture can be employed to work for the dominant order by the mere sleight of hand in manufacturing a false reality through the manipulations of advancing modern technology and advances in modern medicine against the affronted bad objects. And here I am speaking of electronically targeted individuals (TIs) and electronic assaults (EAs). And since Western culture as well as the individual is interested in how advancing technological culture can be employed to work for their benefit by the mere sleight of hand (creations of illusions based in delusion) we are witnessing the manufacturing a false reality through the manipulations of advancing technology and advances in modern medicine against the affronted bad objects. Do we not hear a hint towards Klein’s “bad object”, and now the bad object has now become the frustrating ambivalent father whose lack of concern for the son becomes the roots with which we explain the psychodynamics of male patterned violence?  Does this not accurately describe the events of January 6, 2021 when an angry mob of people stormed the US Capitol? And, too, does this psychodynamic not play out in the female psyche as well? 

Chodorow writes:   

“On the ground, my own historical reading is that both components of masculinity fuse in the Holocaust and in other genocides, where ethnic cleansing often includes the mass rape of women and the murder of helpless old men and boys, in the sexual humiliation and torture of men as well as women by right-wing dictatorships, and in those Islamic countries that restrict and terrorize women and punish severely those who violate sexual codes. Male sexual terrorism against women and men express ethnic, religious, and state power in reaction to national and ethnic humiliations through gendered and sexual psychic lenses …  

We find similar dynamics in homophobia, which is often latent in terrorist ideology and direct in the torture and murder of gays, both in the United States and as we find homosexuality proscribed and brutally punished in other countries. In this context, homosexuality is figured both as submissiveness to other men and as challenging the male-to-female divide, making some men feminine [as I have theorized in the opening with the fear surrounding the symbolic imaginary of the female maternal body]. The particular dynamics that lead to homophobic violence are, of course, complex and varied, but I think it is worth stressing the regressive pull toward and fear of old libidinal and identificatory positions – in the case of men, schematically, to attachment to father and to a terrifying identification or fusion with mother (Chodorow, 2012).”   

It is important to say that there is a small category of men who are turned into the submissive Object by their dominant abusive female spouses. Although, domestic violence (DV) and intimate partner violence (IPV) are carried out primarily by men against women, there are a small number of women who have been labeled “Deadly Women” because of the violence they employ with others. These women abuse their male spouses as well as others, both male or female, who stand in their way.  

How the psychodynamics of violence are diffused in acts of sexual deviance  

Body expansion (BE and B2E) fantasies are tied to these same roots of hostility toward the maternal/female body. Instead of binding the body with rope, tape, or some other ligature, this form of BDSM binds the body with its own flesh or a flesh substitute which is usually represented as a rubber inflatable suit (Gates, 2000). These psychic fantasies, when primarily used against females, may hint towards the complexity surrounding the introjection of mother and the absence of normal Oedipal growth, lacking a gradual working through of the loss and separation of mother that Kristeva speak of and which I referenced early in this paper (Kristeva, 1989). We can certainly make a connection here to Winnicott’s theory (1971) on object mastery:  

“At this point of development that is under survey the subject is creating the object in the sense of finding externality itself, and it has to be added that this experience depends on the object’s capacity to survive.” (It is important that ‘survive’, in this context, means ‘not retaliate’.)  

The maternal body introjected in to the psyche when a sudden, violent, traumatic rupture occurs can develop into Freud’s Ego Ideal, that is, the narcissistic idealization of the paternal image born of the powerful father in the exaltation of the psychic murder of the mother. Weiland writes:  

“Irigaray describes Clytemnestra’s murder as the archaic murder of the mother that established the right of the father. Aeschylus’ trilogy, The Oresteia, portrays the murder of Agamemnon by his wife Clytemnestra and, subsequently, the murder of Clytemnestra, together with her lover Aegisthus, by their son Orestes. After the murder Orestes is persecuted by the Furies, maternal goddesses that seek revenge for the murder of the mother, and by Clytemnestra’s ghost. Exhausted he arrives in Athens and takes refuge in Athena’s temple. In the final part of the Oresteia Orestes is tried by the Athenian High Court presided over by Athena, with Apollo taking Orestes’ defence. In this trial Apollo argues that the murder of Agamemnon by Clytemnestra is a bigger crime than the murder of Clytemnestra by her son Orestes because the child does not belong to mother but to father. Orestes’ duty was, therefore, to avenge his father’s death by murdering his mother. In Athena’s casting vote that declares Orestes innocent we have the final dictum that the child belongs to father, not to mother, and in Apollo’s passionate defence of Orestes we have the birth of the paternal superego. The paternal principle having thus been established, Orestes is exonerated and the Furies are rendered harmless – they are indeed invited to make Athens their residence and are offered a cavern on the Acropolis” (Weiland, 1996).  

Weiland further writes:   

Technology is, of course, linked to the use of the object. As such it partakes in the struggle for the establishment of externality and involves attacks on the object, as well as the search for an object which, unlike the murdered mother, would survive the attacks. To the extent to which concern has not been established technology is ruthless. To the extent to which externality has not been established technology is a narcissistic extension of the self that relates more to faeces than to baby” (Weiland, 1996).    

So, the introjection of mother as the “bad object” is a predominant theme that holds true for both little boys and little girls. But what happens when an adult bisexual female Object who, forced through electromagnetic frequency manipulation, that is clandestine, surreptitious electronic assaults and electronic attacks against the body via an electromagnetic tether is made to give up her paternal superego defence; active work outs and weight lifting which act as a defence AGAINST her internalized maternal bad object, and instead is abused through forced sedation/stimulation via an electromagnetic tether? Do we not have an unknown dominant phallic ego abusing a female bisexual subordinate Object into a further subordinate position of “silenced, muted sexuality” (Walker, 1998)? We can read the silence to this act of matricidal destruction through a projection onto the Object the repudiated cultural symbolic of the maternal body. This is exactly the matricidal destructiveness born out of infantile anxieties in an age of advancing technological culture! Let me reiterate, since the “technological culture of selfhood” becomes an integral part of advancing technological cultural, and part of technological culture is Object mastery, technology becomes the avenue with which men (and women) seek to vindicate their injured narcissistic egos against the “Achilles complex”. And here in lies the charlatan act, the lie, the fraud carried out by doctors, scientists and those interested in how advancing technological culture can be used to work for the dominant order by the mere sleight of hand in manufacturing a false reality through the manipulations of reality using advances in modern technology and advances in modern medicine against the affronted bad objects. And since Western culture as well as the individual is interested in how advancing technological culture can be employed to work for their benefit by the mere sleight of hand creating an illusion based in a delusion, the manufacturing of a false reality through advances in modern technological culture and medicine becomes the narcissistic egos solution in defence against their affronted bad objects. This is how the masculine ego shore’s up its wounded identity when there has been a psychical defeat. Do we not see Western cultures “Fort-da”; its compulsion to repeat by creating an illusion based in a delusion? Do we not hear a hint toward Klein’s “bad breast/object“, except the bad object can be worked out as belonging to both the frustrating ambivalent breast of the mother with a lack of concern for the infant and the frustrating ambivalent father whose lack of concern for the son becomes the roots with which we explain the psychodynamics of male patterned violence? Were these not what the Witch Trials were all about (Hill, 1995)? The Oresteian myth stands, next to the Oedipus myth, as does Homer’s Iliad with its “Achilles complex” as central Greek myths that express both a psychical and a cultural problem. They both can be used as tools to explain the psychodynamics of violence for both men and women because both men and women are raised by two gendered Objects; one paternal and one maternal. They therefore introject both objects in very diverse way but always some meaningful way, and since The Oresteia portrays vividly the violent event that brings about the death of the early powerful mother as well as the need for defence against the internal persecutors that such an attack on mother produces we can use them side-by-side along with the “Achilles complex” to help explain Western cultures phenomenon of violence and the electronically targeted individual.  

Manufacturing the Monster 

Weiland is most certainly correct to compare modern advancing technology to Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein as it portrays phallic omnipotence in the manufacturing of a monster in the image of the self. The manufacturing of a monster with an observable lack of concern for those involved. Like technology, Frankenstein’s monster was not a monster to start, but as the monster absorbs the projections of those with whom he is confronted he evolves. Technology, like Frankenstein’s monster, has become “the thing” that cannot feel empathy, concern, or pity for those that use it. Like money, it has become a vehicle for which men assuage their fears and mount their hopes for the future, for something better. Hopefully a better life. But like Dr. Frankenstein, technology cannot fill the empty void; the fracture in the soul of man. It becomes the band-aid for a wound that is too deep to fix without the work of mourning.   

While writing this paper, the events in U.S. News on January 5 and January 6, 2021 transpired. First, on January 5, some unknown person hacked a “secure” radio frequency and several New York air traffic controllers heard an automated message “We are going to fly a plane into the Capitol on Wednesday. Soleimani’s death will be avenged.” Then on January 6, a large group of protesters dressed like Trump supports stormed the US Capitol, breaking through barricades, smashing the Capitol’s windows, and mounting a revolt in side the complex against the election of Joe Biden. I like to quote Adrienne Harris: 

“Whether as a bludgeoning force or a subtle glance, “History comes to us,’ in the neo liberal state, as in the totalitarian. Intimacy is the contradictory site of freedom and regulation. Intimate life, particularly the intimate life of the body, of gendered experience, and of sexuality, however delicate, sensually rich, secretive, archaic, or primitive, is always already infused by regulation, by violence, and by power (Harris; 2017).”  

Harris’ said one of her tasks in writing ‘Intimacy: The tank in the bedroom‘ was to speak about intimacies’ ties to and dependency on social and historic forces. I see it as my task to talk about the manufacturing of ‘monsters’ through the same very forces and the last four years of US politics and news seemed to be focused on just that, manufacturing the ‘monster’. For one might say that like Shelley’s Frankenstein, the monster that stormed the US Capitol on January 6, 2021 was a projection of Donald Trump’s own creation. And what further complicates these manipulations by political leaders are the actions by other players, who, with the interest to further manipulate the press, employ the tactic known as ‘spin’. I believe this is what Russia-Gate was about in the Facebook conspiracy that sought to create ‘spin’ surrounding a US president and a Russian leader. This tactic allowed for ‘kick-back’ to be analyzed. These manipulations further exacerbate the problem that creates distortions, delusions and illusions. Much like the manipulations of reality through the use of advancing technology and advancing medical technology to create a false reality with regard to the Targeted Individual (TIs) suffering electronic assaults (EAs). These actions are the result of matricidal drives which display a lack of ‘concern‘ and ‘reparation‘ toward objects which may be hidden unanalyzed, unconscious fantasy because there has been no working through mourning the loss and separation and rupture with the mother (Winnicott, 1971). And because the act of targeting certain individuals with electronic assault is part of “manufacturing the enemy“, ‘the monster‘ that is based in the sleight hand of an illusionist creating a mythical evil rooted in difference. __________________________________________________________  

Sources: 

Balsam, Rosemary. (2012). Women’s Bodies in Psychoanalysis. East Essex, Canada. Routledge.  

Benvenuto, Bice and Kennedy, Roger. “Psychosis” in The Works of Jacques Lacan: An Introduction. London. Free Associated Books. (1986).  

Butler, Judith. (1997). The Psychic Life of Power: Theories in Subjection. Stanford, CA. Stanford University Press.  

Chasseguet-Smirgel, Janine. (1984). Creativity and Perversion. London. Free Association Books.   

Chodorow, Nancy J. (1978). The Reproduction of Mothering: Psychoanalysis and the Sociology of Gender. Berkeley. University of California Press.    

Chodorow, Nancy J. (1979). Gender, relation and difference in psychoanalytic perspective. In Feminism and psychoanalytic theory. (pp. 99-113). New Haven, CT. Yale University Press, 1989.   

Chodorow, Nancy J. (2012). Individualizing Gender and Sexuality: Theory and Practice. Part of the Relational Perspective Book Series, Volume 53. New York. Routledge: Taylor & Francis. pp. 121-136.   

de Beauvoir, Simone. (1952). The Second Sex. New York. Alfred A. Knopf.   

Fox, James Alan and Fridel Phd., Emma E.  ‘Gender Differences in Patterns and Trends in U.S. Homicide, 1976-2015′. Violence and Gender. Vol. 4, No. 2. June 1 2017.  

Freud, Sigmund. (1905). “Three essays on the theory of sexuality.” Standard Edition, Volume 7. London. Hogarth Press. 

Freud, Sigmund. (1920) Beyond the Pleasure Principle. Translation by J. Strachey. London. W.W. Norton, 1961. 

Freud, Sigmund. (1924). “The dissolution of the Oedipus complex.” Standard Edition. Volume 19. London. Hogarth Press.  

Freud, Sigmund. (1925). “Some psychical consequences of the anatomical distinction between the sexes.” Standard Edition, Volume 19. London. Hogarth Press. 

Freud, Sigmund. (1931). “Female Sexuality.” Standard Edition, Volume 21. London. Hogarth Press.  

Freud, Sigmund (1932). “Femininity.” Standard Edition, Volume 22. London. Hogarth Press. 

Gates, Katherine. (2000). Deviant Desires: Incredibly strange sex. New York. Juno Books.  

Harris, Adrienne. ‘Intimacy: The tank in the bedroom.’ The International Journal of Psychoanalysis. Volume 98, Issue 3, June 2017. pp 585-960. 

Hill, Frances. (1995). A Delusion of Satan: The full story of the Salem Witch Trials. Cambridge, MA.  Da Capo Press.  

Holmes, Lucy. (2008). The Internal Triangle: New Theories of Female Development. New York. Jason Aronson.   

Holmes, Lucy. (2013). Wrestling with Destiny: The promise of psychoanalysis. New York. Routledge.  

Horney, Karen. (1932). The dread of woman. In Feminine psychology (pp. 133-146). New York. Norton, 1967.    

Jacobs, Amber. (2007). On Matricide: Myth, Psychoanalysis, and the Law of the Mother. New York. Columbia University Press.  

Jones, E. (1927). The early development of female sexuality. In Papers on Psychoanalysis. London. Maresfield Reprints.    

Klein, Melanie. (1946). ‘Some Notes on Some Schizoid Mechanisms’. In Envy and Gratitude and Other Works: 1946 – 1963. London. Virago, 1988. Retrieved online January 7, 2021. https://tcf-website-media-library.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/25114704/Klein-M-1946-Notes-on-Some-Schizoid-Mechanisms.-In-Envy-and-Gratitude-and-Other-Works.-Delta-Books-1975.pdf

Klien, Melanie. Envy and Gratitude and Other Works: 1946 – 1963. London. Virago, 1988.   

Klein, Melanie. (1959) Our adult world and its roots in infancy. In The Writings of Melanie Klein, Vol. III. London: Hogarth Press, 1984.  

Klein, Melanie and Riviera, J. (1964). Love, Hate, and Reparation. New York. W.W. Norton.  

Klein, Melanie. The Psychoanalysis of Children. London. Vintage, 1997.    

Knafo, Danielle and Feiner, Kenneth. (2006). Unconscious Fantasies and the Relational World. Part of the Relational Perspective Book Series, Volume 31. Hillside, NJ. The Analytic Press, Inc.  

Kristeva, Julia. ‘Stabat Mater’, translation by Arthur Goldhammer in The Female Body in Western Culture: Contemporary Perspectives, Susan Rubin Suleiman ed. (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1986, pp. 99-118). Also in Tales of Love translation by Leon S. Roudiez (New York: Columbia University Press, 1987, pp. 234-63). Originally published as Histoires d’amour (Paris: Denoel, 1983). “Stabat Mater” first published in Herethique de l’amour”, Tel Quel 74 (Winter) 1977.  

Kristeva, Julia. (1989). Black Sun. New York. Columbia University Press.  

 Main, Mary. (1995). “Attachment: Overview, with implications for clinical work.” In S. Goldberg, R. Muir, & J. Kerr (Ed’s.), Attachment theory: Social, development and clinical perspective (pp. 407-474). Hillsdale, NJ. Analytic Press.  

Mitchell, Juliette. (2000). Madmen and Medusa’s: Reclaiming hysteria. New York. Basic Books.  

Perper, Joshua A. and Cina, Stephen J. (2010). When Doctors Kill: Who, Why, and How. New York. Copernicus Books. The authors wrote the following quotation for the opening of their book and its reference to “God” in a nod to the scientist and medical doctor but not in a good sense:  “I am God, your Physician” (Ex. 15:26). The prophets also acknowledge God as a Healer and Jeremiah stated: “Heal us, and we will be healed” (from the blessing for healing, Jeremiah 17:14). Throughout the Torah, God is imbued with great healing powers. It is no wonder that it is written, “The Lord giveth, the Lord taketh away” when it comes to health, wealth, and life itself.”  

Stoller, R. (1965). The sense of maleness. In Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 34, 207-218.   

The United States Attorney’s Bulletin. U.S. Department of Justice. Cyber Misbehavior. Vol. 64, No. 3, May 2016. Retrieved online January 6, 2021. https://www.justice.gov/usao/file/851856/download  

Van Brunt, Brian, Amy Murphy, Lisa Pescara-Kovach, and Gina-Lyn Crance. ‘Early Identification of Grooming and Targeting in Predatory Sexual Behavior on College Campuses.’ Vol. 6, No. 1. Violence and Gender. March 2019. 

Walker, Michelle Boulous. (1998) Philosophy and the Maternal Body: Reading silence. New York. Routledge.  

Wallin, David J. (2007). Attachment in Psychotherapy. New York. The Guilford Press.  

Weiland, Christina. (1996). ‘Matricide and Destructiveness: Infantile Anxieties and Technological Culture.’ British Journal of Psychotherapy 12, No. 3; 300-313.  

Winnicott, D.W. (1971). “The use of the Object and relating through identifications.” In Playing and Reality. Harmondsworth. Penguin, 1980.  

Wolf, Naomi. (2002). The Beauty Myth. New York. Harper Collins.