Kristeva’s theory exposed the limits of the Lacanian premise which according to Lacan, the paternal law structures all linguistic signification termed “the Symbolic”. It is this law that provides the opportunity for individuals to create meaningful language, and thus, meaningful experience, through the repression of primary libidinal drives, including the radical dependency of the child on the maternal body. Hence, the Symbolic only becomes possible by repudiating the primary relationship to the maternal body. The “subject” who emerges as a consequence of this repression becomes a bearer or proponent of this repressive law.
It is this subversion that can go on to create many abnormal conditions within the psyche like repudiating the female pregnant body through anorexia and bulimia. Fears surrounding weight gain and “fat” seems to be a common condition of not only women but men too. Should I dare to say this position is “not normal” seems ironic since so many women, and men, fear maternal body manifestation. That is to say, the symbolic order of their mothers. There exist women who spend a portion of there time on the couch trying to liberate themselves of these fears so they may go on and create a healthy family life with children.
Kristeva argues that the “semiotics” is a deminision of language occasioned by that primary maternal body, which not only refutes Lacan’s primary premise, but serves as a perpetual source of subversion within the Symbolic.
Yet, in my case, the actual weakening of a healthy body through electronic torture and electronic intrusions which have gone on to create my large “symbolic” stature does not exist to empower me. On the contrary, quite the opposite. It seems to humiliate and oppress me. It is now up to me to play the hand that has been dealt to me, as best I can, because ending the stalking seems an impossibility.
It would seem I have to come to terms with the hatred my previous way of being has caused someone. I have to embrace an unhealthy life style and seccumb to it. Yielding to this superior power or force of electronic torture and intrusion, similar to the subversion from the original encounter with that maternal symbolic order, electronic targeting creates its own subversive atmosphere in which one is asked to replace healthy choices with unhealthy ones and it is done through training via electronic punishments. In yielding to the oppression of the original maternal body, it is a metaphorical death that is experienced. These acts of targeted electronic assault and torture creates the very same experience; a castrating death that subverts the original identity.
The subject area we are dealing with is the transformation of identity via clandestine means of subterfuge and object relations. It reflects a desire to institute through symbolic law (the original aggressive paternal symbolic of signification which Freud gave to use and Kristeva expanded on) . Does this act of subterfuge carry with it a portion of pleasure that haunts desire as that which can never be attained, the irrecoverable memory of annihilation and humiliation at the hands of the maternal symbolic before “the law” at a time when the breast was with held? Lacan is clear that the pleasure before the law is only fantasized. This would make it a phantasm or along the lines of the phantasmagorical which one might make the association with when observing the deviant sexual desire of female body inflation. But this “with holding” of the breast becomes the place or site of a denial.
The agitation over my way of being seems to propel the hatred against me. But I dare say, if any other person falls into discord with my perpetrator they too might be facing a similar dilemma to mine.
Judith Butler (1990) Gender Trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York. Routledge.
Since February 2022 and the incessant electronic intrusions I’ve been receiving, I have gained weight. This has left me to wonder if weight gain and the targeted electronic physical assaults I’m receiving to my body are aspects of someone’s anal sadistic universe as transgressions against my female flesh. With the phenomenon of the Targeted Individual (TI) and my personal private suffering at the hands of someone’s electronic punishments, I’m left to understand these violent aggressive transgressions as castration from the point of differential substitution which subverts the original hated object – the original maternal body or hatred of “mother”.
Since castration is posited from the masculine perspective simply because of its aggressive nature and phallic content, according to Freud, is it therefore the opposite of femininity? Modern philosophy in psychoanalysis has made discerning identity for these invisible, yet very visible and real, assaults in a difficult position to uncover when it comes to the the gender perspective simply because everyone comes under the subjectification of a Mother and the subjectification of a Father. The question then becomes how does the pre-Oedipal Mother go on to affect the experience with the Oedipal Father and visa versa. And is there an interplay at all? One would assume, of course there must be.
Does not the nostalgia for heimlichfemininity(**), for the woman as the tame, domesticated essence of domesticity and homeliness turn out to be a deluded, murderous narcissistic fantasy that in reality represses that feminine difference and kills the real woman off. This murderous narcissistic fantasy presented in reality, belongs both to male and female children alike because the first body all people come in contact with is the maternal female body. Thus, the murderous narcissistic fantasy possessed by aggressive femininity is the desire to humiliate that differential femininity from reality. It is the aggressive narcissistic fantasy of someone who gets pulled in to their anal sadistic universe, to annihilate that differential femininity by phallic castration (weight gain) because it is the male phallus that humiliates the female body by imposing and extending its bulging throbbing phallus, in transference, onto the female body as the “female pregnant maternal body”, that object of repudiation which is perceived by many women to be the extension of patriarchal oppression. It is this object that represents ultimate female oppression and weakness and perhaps the reason why the female pregnant body remained silent in theory for so long. The female pregnant body represents very real castrating fears to both men and women alike.
Thus, the original hated place IS the original hated object of unheimlich femininity.
(**) Heimlich Femininity – when referring to the field of psychoanalysis, heimlich femininity belongs to the house or family, usually perceived as tame and companionable to man, at least according to Freud. That is to say, belonging to the realm of Freudian femininity, those nurturing characteristics belonging to a woman of childbearing age; agreeable, compliant, hospitable and obedient. So, if someone is referring to unheimlich femininity, it means the woman is uncompanionable to man (incompatible). Of course, this provides clues to hidden psychic content of the patient (perpetrator) as the “over-weight maternal image” may sometimes appear to be unfeminine when disciplining an unruly child.
In Eric Santner’s perspective (Stranded Objects: Mourning, Memory and Film in Postwar Germany, 1992, Cornell University Press) heimlich meant belonging to the German culture. Heimlich meant belonging to the German house or German culture or meant what it meant to be a German man or woman. This perspective is tied closely to what we now perceive as DIFFERENCE. Thus, sexual or cultural difference:
“This unheimlich place however is the place to the former heimat [home] of all human beings, to the place where all human beings dwelt once upon a time and in the beginning. There is a humorous saying, “Love is a homesickness,” and whenever a man dreams of a place or a country and says to himself, still in the dream, this place is familiar to me, I have been here before,” we may interpret the ace as being his mother’s body. (Felman, 1993, John Hopkins University Press, p. 63)
The “un” that is spoken prior to heimlich is the site of repression. So, for some narcissistic woman this “unheimlich femininity” turns out to be that which is foreign to the person’s own way of being. Please refer to the “unheimlich” during the German Holocaust. That is to say during this time, these unheimlich persons were the German Jew, the disabled person, the mentally retarded individual, the Gypsy, the Jehovah Witness, those who rejected the Nazi agenda, and anyone who was not German or for the Nazi cause.
“Central to feminists perspectives is a controversy between radical feminist views of “motherhood as the annihilation of women” or at least motherhood as the quintessential existence of women’s powerlessness, of their definition from outside themselves, and of the control and exploitation of their bodies” This is the perspective I presume regarding my experience with electronic torture and its intrusions into my personal and private rights to space. Of course, the perpetrator (who should be treated for their illness) doing this to me silently expresses their belief that over weight women are weak and humiliated by the castrating effects of electronic torture and its usurpations of one’s free will. For these are the echoing and generalized perceptions of motherhood held by many men and women. That is to say, pregnancy results in female castration and is not perceived as the contrary; a unique experience of fulfillment and realization of womanhood (Felman, 1993, p. 166, Note 28 Italics added).
It has become clear to me, since the fact that my electronic torture and intrusions began in the early morning hours of my day while I carried out my exercise routine, low body weight was not part of the culture of the perpetrator caring out these assaults and that weight gain is more closely associated with the perpetrator’s culture.
Shoshana Felman (1993) “What Does A Woman Want: Reading and Sexual Difference”. Baltimore, Maryland. John Hopkins University Press.
NOTE: African American poet Audrey Lorde, in her poem “There Are No Honest Poems About Dead Woman,” asks:
“What do we want from each other,
after we have told our stories
do we want
do we want to be healed – do we want
mossy quiet stealing over our scars
do we want
the all-powerful unfrightening sister
who will make the pain go away ….
I buy time with another story.
It becomes clear, as a woman, we must “buy time”, and it is with women that we must, today, create time.
And I feel that a part of who I am has been killed off by some rogue agent operating in the shadows. Indeed there are no honest poems about dead women. With whom do you believe your lot is cast? And where does your strength come?
Freud’s question, “What does a woman want?” in other ways displaces an deconstructs the question by emploring, “With whom do you believe your lot is cast? And where does your strength come?”
That femininity is given and not chosen, and sometimes falsely given is reverberated in one of Adrienne Rich’s poems, “there is a whom and a where that is not chosen”. The female question, thus, is this:
The difference registers no longer a “what” but a “with whom” is your desire, a desire of addressing with whom do you believe your lot has been cast? And the question is one of empowerment, “From wh
Over the past year I uncovered how similar gang stalking assaults with electronic harassment and electronic physical assaults are to the 5 cyber security vulnerabilities of cyber crime. Today I came across an article that details how researcher Joey Chen of Sentinel Labs says he spotted a decade of cyber attacks he would be happy to attribute to a single Chinese gang. Chen has named the gang Aoqin Dragon.
Aoqin Dragon’s attacks are not unsimilar to other cyber types of attacks; compromise a machine and seek wider network access so the gang can find juicy information. Welcoming all of us to the next age of much needed service security surveillance protection and the dawn of cyber wars.
“The targeting of Aoqin Dragon closely aligns with the Chinese government’s political interests,” Chen wrote, adding “considering this long-term effort and continuous targeted attacks for the past few years, we assess the threat the actor’s motives are espionage oriented.”
I find the similarities with my own private targeting and electronic harassment suspiciously similar to this type of cyber crime. For my own private attacks are clandestine telecommunications surveillance and “listening” to my private communication via wireless access. The method, compromise any device (in this case a human body implanted with “listening software” and GPS tracking sets the stage of for the targeted harassments of the future. It’s definitely a form of cyber crime as it violates several US constitutional rights.
Today, gangs are no different than secretive clandestine agencies within governments. Technology can be acquired cheaply and with a little knowledge and a network of supporters is exactly how democracies work to dismantle opposing “ill-fitting interests.”
China is often accused of using foul means to acquire secrets from private sectors and governments organizations. Might we not say the same of the way the East German Secret Police (STAZI) and Russia conducted their affairs?
The same skills required by advanced spy networks are the same skills imploded by gang stalkers; continue advancing your tradecraft and continue to find new methods of evading detection to stay longer in the targeted zone.
News of the group’s activities follows 3 US government agencies – the NSA, FBI, CISA. These 3 agencies have jointly announced that China-backed actors are attacking routers and network attached storage devices to exfiltrate data from carriers and network service providers.
The difference between cyber attacks like Aoqin Dragon and my private targeting is the difference between compromising a machine (computer or computer network) and compromising a human body (specifically vulnerable human bodies) for acquisition.
Aoqin Dragon targets devices that have not patched exploits from 2017 – 2021. This leaves me to wonder what exploits have Targeted Individuals “not patched” within their own human bodies. After all, human bodies are not machines owned by a larger corporation? Or are they?
To learn how these cyber attacks share similar vulnerabilities with the phenomenon of gang stalking, please click on the link below:
Anyone who knows me, knows I workout in my own home. But there maybe something, those who know me, don’t know. I’ve been electronically targeted with electronic physical assaults for a quite a few years now.
Recently, I tried to resume my early morning workouts at 4:00 AM but I’m greeted with wireless, electronic convulsive shock to my brain. If you think that I have a creative imagination and think that I’m making this up, you obviously have never met a psychopath who can change his demeanor in the flash of a moment. Or you are so.eone who believes real evil just doesn’t exist in this world. Stop lying to yourself before it happens to you.
These wireless electronic physical assaults are designed to hobble the individual target. They are designed to slowly destroy you. Targeted Individuals know these assaults as the Lesser Tradition of Specialized Torture and it is happening to people all over the world. They are part of a barbaric history known to man who utilized these methods during wartime. Although they are not exclusively used by military, people who find themselves tortured are dealing with a psychopath. I believe my torture may be tied to police brutality.
I started studying psychoanalysis because I was interested in the truth behind gang stalking with targeted electronic physical assaults. What I discovered about gang stalking is this. One, targeted individuals are being pulled into a game. A game the master of ceremonies wants you to engage in. Second, I discovered the reason for the targeting is due to some conflict or difference. The targeted individual has been selected because they have been deemed “less valuable.” This happens all the time in policing with black men and women. Society is chock full of people’s differences. Third, the electronic physical assaults are designed to slowly destroy you. That is, the master of ceremonies wants to control you individually and take charge of your life and death. My father was being targeted and he ended up in hospice taking his own life.
The only way to address this problem is by telling your story. Your story will shed light on the real facts and not some obscure phenomenon people try to gaslight you with by telling you to “get your tin foil hat.” Gang stalking is done by some pretty ruthless people and it’s a REAL phenomenon, not just something made up imagined or hallucinated. I’m here to tell you to BELIEVE!
The novel, The Girl With The Golden Eyes by Balzac, turns out to uncover the unconscious narcissistic fantasy of homosexuality and gender identity issues. In Shoshana Felman’s analysis the “act of reading femininity” and reading the silence of what is being explicitly screened out when a subject is speaking, and expressing their gender identity, turns out to be a crucial skill in communication and also in psychoanalysis. Of course, I am referring to skills of listening to silence pregnant with communication. I asked the question, “What is being screened out when a man dresses as a woman? Consider the following excerpt from “What Does A Woman Want?” by Shoshana Felman:
“The return of the lost name of the father in the denouement therefore strips Henri of his (adoptive) proper name, de Marsay, leaving him, indeed, with no name that he can claim to be his own, that he can claim to be his proper name. The cultural procedure of name giving as insuring representative authority is no longer valid in the story: the (male) authority of name givers, customarily father and husband, is here disrupted: the father is no longer truly and legitimately represented by the son, in much the same way as the masculine is no longer truly and legitimately represented by the feminine. The NAME OF THE FATHER, which traditionally is supposed to symbolize and to guarantee both propriety (proper name) and property (gold), here turns out to symbolize both impropriety, loss of proper name, and dispossession, loss of gold [and, as we know, represents as a stand-in for the phallus] : it emerges in the very place of the symbolic loss of thegolden eyes.
As I have stated in a previous post, Paquita’s golden eyes become reflective of Henri’s phallus. Henri’s phallus being symbolic to his father who turns out to be Lord Dudley. As a purloined package, Paquita becomes the screen woman to Henri’s unconscious narcissistic fantasy for his own phallus. (You really need to read her book!) Her, as an object that is used to screen out the true incestuous (unconscious) narcissistic fantasy. The golden eyes were thus the screen and the screen has been a mirror, blinding in it’s refractions, dazzling in it’s brilliance and it’s play on its ray of light reflections and deflections. Under the right conditions, can deal a lethal blow to someone’s ego in it’s unveiling.
The story is a novel involving a Menaechmi (men-a-heck-mus). It becomes a play about two twins and mistaken identity. We could certainly say this about lesbian love. This becomes apparent when Henri discovers the Marquise is his sister. This recognition scene in which Henri and his sister are re-united, answers the question, “Who is the secret enemy? What is the identity of the rival, of the third term in the triangular drama of desire?” The answer: himself. Since Henri beholds in his enemy the exact reflections of his own desire and of his own murderous jealousy.
In a separate side note, it is the hypothesis that all girls born bisexual because the first erotic experience with the world is the mother. In lesbian love, is it an unconscious narcissistic wish (a fantasy) for the return to this close intimacy with “mother?”
In analyzing this story, it only becomes apparent after the “eraser of the screen”, that is, after Paquita’s murder, the revelation scene which continues as the Marquise is Henri’s sister and the reason why Paquita loved him is because she saw that same familiar look in his face.
In Balzac’s story, Paquita is murdered with a dagger to the chest. In Felman’s analysis, the chest can also point to a sign of difference, and that difference as a signifier of femininity [submissiveness]. In this sense, the text could here be answering, that the girl with the golden eyes has died because she is a woman; she was sacrificed, repressed, because she incarnated feminity as otherness, as real sexual difference.
Through the erasure of the screen woman, Paquita, femininity becomes a euphemism, at once for its sexuality, for its difference and repression AND for its blindness to itself. A euphemism for the sexuality of speaking bodies and their delusions and their dreams, determined by a signifier fraught with their castration AND their death. Thus, the death of Paquita in the novel’s denouement becomes the symbolic of “a figure of silencing, of the very silencing of a woman, of the repression of the very functioning of repression. The text, nonetheless, through its very silencing of death by language, opens up an ironic space that articulates the force of the question of femininity as the substitution between blind language and insightful, pregnant silence – between a languagethreatened and traversed by silence, and the silence out of which language speaks.
Artist rendition of “The Girl With The Golden Eyes”
Using Shoshana Felman’s analysis of Honore de Balzac’s work, “The Girl with the Golden Eyes, which helps answer her question, “What is femininity – for men?” – mean for women?
This work is actually a provocative erotic riddle, specifically addressing the question of sexual difference. The main character apprehends the vision of a woman whom he thinks is the most adorable feminine woman he has ever met. What strikes him the most about her visage is “her two eyes, as yellow as a tiger’s eye, gleaming as gold, living gold, brooding gold, amorous gold, gold that wants to come into your pocket….She is the very essence of woman, an abyss of pleasure whose depths may never be sounded: the ideal woman.”
This main character of the novel is Henri de Marsay. Taking into consideration the time period (1835) where men were the only people who possessed any kind of “real financial income,” Felman interprets this symbolism for the sign it represents. Namely, that gold is a reflective material of light and thereby becomes the mirror in which Henri can see himself. Thus, the “golden eyes” of femininity are fundamentally a mirror in which the male sees himself, and Henri can contemplate his own idealized self-image so as to admire himself. As we see in Henri’s impression of her response to him, “Judging from the expression on her face, she seemed to be saying: “What! you are here, my ideal, the being I have thought of, I have dreamed of night and morning!”
In Feldman’s interpretation from her book, she writes:
“The golden brilliance of the girl with the golden eyes is fascinating, says Henri, because it is an amorous gold that wants to come into his pocket.” Paradoxically, gold as the metaphor of the utmost value is an image, at the same time, of possession and of appropriation, through which the ideal woman is again reduced to a mere object, whose sole function is to be possessed and owned by man. But the metaphor evoked by Henri of the gold that wants to come into his pocket is even more ambiguous than that, since, carrying a clear erotic connotation suggestive of the sexual act, grants the golden eyes of femininity a phantasmic masculine – phallic – role. Ironically enough, femininity itself thus turns out to be a metaphor for the phallus. To the extent that the girl with the golden eyes is here viewed by Henri as the tool for his purely narcissistic satisfaction, Henri’s desire for the ideal woman can be said to be a sort of masturbation fantasy [erotic automata?]: his own phallus is indeed the prize he seeks.”
In much the same way as, in the prologue of this novel, gold was said to be ruling principle of the social classes and social division was determined by how much gold was owned. “…A principle of domination and of heirarchy, so the golden phallus in the story is beckoning from behind the mask of a woman’s beauty, is to be wishfully recuperated and restored to it’s proper place: man’s pocket.”
This is precisely my interpretation of certain forms of homosexuality, if not all forms, is the creative recuperation of lost territory from early childhood. This ideal woman is of course an illusion but one that may be rooted in abuse and neglect, or even poverty, of the maternal figure. And of course the “cure,” if one decides that is, in fact, what one needs, can be found in the developmental task of mourning “the lost perfect mother”. Thus, the girl with the golden eyes is thus the very name of woman and of femininity as a fantasy of man because the nurturing ideal feminine was never experienced and must be mourned. Thus, the theory of the “dead mother” and theories of matricide. Feldman further writes:
“Defined by man, the conventional polarity of masculine and feminine names woman as “a metaphor of man.” Sexuality, in other words, functions here as the sign of a rhetorical convention, of which woman is the signifier and man the signified. Man alone has thus the privilege of proper meaning, literal identity: femininity, as signifier, cannot signify itself; it is but a metaphor, a figurative substitute; it can but refer to a man, to the phallus, as it’s proper meaning, as it’s signified. The rhetorical hierarchization of the very opposition between the sexes [sexual difference] is then such that woman’s difference is suppressed, being totally subsumed by the reference of the feminine to masculine identity.” This academic information of intellectual knowledge of erudition helps explain why some men’s wives look like “arm candy” as the golden mirror of the man’s golden phallus. Thus, men who define themselves by the woman they select are seeking the imaginary reflective “golden eye” to identify and signify them as “worthy phallus.”
But let’s hypothetically entertain other possibilities. How about when a woman beholds, in a man, the feminine ideal? What if she’s sees in his visage the soft feminine features from the lost territory, a territory that she rightfully deserves but was never given due to trauma, abuse, and/or neglect? And is it this masculine possessing femininity an ideal in male selection that sets up the scaffolding for a desire, in a woman, a desire that wishes to satisfy her fantasy from the lost territory of early childhood, “the nurturing mother” and owned bisexuality? Or how about when an older man, in the sexual act of pedophilia, selects the ideal feminine in young adolescence males? What important connections can be made with these scenarios? Is it the triangulation of the Mother-Father-Self in narcissistic satisfaction which idealizes the lost terrain of Oedipus, which to begin with is a fantasy construction. That the signifier (masculine phallus) possess the signified (femininity) and is it a reflective mirror of the man desiring his own phallus in a modified version of this same bisexuality?
We know a lot of women love homosexual men because they possess a femininity about them that may call us back, in creative fashion, to the recuperation of the lost territory, the lost perfect mother who can be our ideal love?
“Women, however, are considered merely as the objects of desire, and as the objects of the question. To the extent that woman “are the question,” they cannot enunciate the question; they cannot be the speaking subjects of knowledge or the science that the question seeks.” ~Shoshana Felman, Textuality and the Riddle of Bisexuality, “What Does A Woman Want?: Reading Silence and Sexual Difference
In my study of feminist writers, I have discovered the realm of confusing linguistic discourse. For example, the fact that America will say, “We are in the business of saving lives.” What they fail to mention is the financial worth of those lives they are willing to “save”. America does, and has, in fact, saved lives. But America fails to tell you on whose backs advancing medicine plunges medical history forward. Historically, this has been prison inmates, black slaves, the financially challenged, pregnant women, even foster children. Groups that have been deemed “less valuable” and are very vulnerable.
This is true, so much so. One has to question China’s military power, as an American adversary, compared to America’s soldier power? It just doesn’t compare. What is America preparing for? The new SCOTUS over turning Roe vs Wade. It is true, conservatives are interested in raising children (Pro-Life) to fill slots in their army. Is this to compete with a red China army?
Even the ethic of mental health is masculine discourse. Who gets to decide what is “madness” and who gets to decide if a person’s “madness” is in need of a cure? These are riddles our leaders struggle with answering effectively. Except “effectively” seems to amount only to, a swing of a pendulum, back and forth that is incumbent upon the tides of time. The pandemic hit and suddenly the death penalty was taken off moritorium. As death row inmates ran for appeals, one by one, on a daily basis, mostly men were executed. Were our pandemic checks the result of this blood money? The money it would take to keep and care for the worst of the worst? This is economics 101.
I have learned our laws are not absolute nor are they static but rather dynamic and flexible depending on influences of leadership and the time period. The winds of change can, and do bring tides that wash up old ideas.
In the textuality of gang stalking with electronic assaults and psychotronic torture, the answer to the narrative of the phenomenology is this: “The targeted individual is mentally ill and in need of psychiatric services.” This doesn’t make sense, since the onset of the torture drives some to go on antidepressants so they don’t end up killing themselves. Yet, the torture continues. Why? It’s because torturing the “mentally ill” is something narcissists do in order to subjugate and fashion the individual into becoming a tool for their own personal use. Whether this is to be made an example of in an act of vendetta, “Don’t ever fuck with me again.” Or if it is used to manipulate the victim for sexual pleasure doesn’t matter. What matters is the personal freedoms of those victimized are usurped by a power that violates Sir Roger Bacon’s philosophy of the four principles for grasping truth. The first being submission to a power of leadership unworthy of allegiance. But then I suppose that is exactly why the person commiting the electronic targeting does so in surreptitious fashion. They know they are unworthy of the victim’s attention and seek to remove this obstacle by clandestine subterfuge. This is to question, “What is the controller not saying while he is SPEAKING?” Roger Bacon new this truth all too well. The answer to this question in Sir Roger Bacon’s time was the correctanswer because those selected to answer the question didn’t know the answer or wanted to conceal the truth.
Sir Roger Bacon’s four obstacles of grasping truth in his “Opus Majus”:
1. Submission to faulty or unworthy authority.
2. Influence of custom.
3. Popular prejudice.
4. Concealment of one’s own ignorance accompanied by an ostentatious display of knowledge.
Truth is not sought in hiding the hand that is stealing to avoid punishment. Truth enlightens and brings guilt of crime out in the open.
These so called rights granted to the “poor” WILL be violated if Roe Vs. Wade is over turned. Simply because religious philosophy does not equate with Democratic Philosophy (Church Vs State). As long as legalized killing is allowed abortion and death with dignity will never be clean nor will it ever be as simple as a command to, “Do no killing.” It is a dirty business within healthcare and women’s rights to healthcare, the prison’s subjugation of it’s inmates, and death with dignity. The fact that it will never be “clean” means it will always be a complex issue. So, what is this new SCOTUS saying to the American public without explicitly saying it? It’s more than just, “Women have no rights to their body when it comes to pregnancy.” It goes much deeper in church obedience. Once again, politics has reared it’s ugly masculine discourse.
When dealing with the invisible we are always dealing with imaginary symbolic terrain. In analyzing what Shoshana Felman calls the sociological sexism of the educational system which corresponds to the symbolic metaphor in Plato’s Cave, in which it took feminist authors to unravel the fact that what we were actually dealing with regard to Plato’s Cave metaphor, was actually the symbolic fecund womb of maternity. Likewise, in Felman’s analysis of Honore de Balzac’s work entitled “Adieu,” a short story about an officer, his mistress, and the Napoleonic War, the madness of the woman Stephanie is completely ignored by male critics who analyzed Balzac’s work. Her madness is rooted in the trauma of having to watch her husband drown while in a life raft floating toward safety. The male critics of this story instead focus on the “reality” and “realism” of Balzac’s work depiction of war. And in reading this story through the eyes of a woman, Felman’s opinion is the interpretation that this mad woman (Stephanie) in Balzac’s work is rendered invisible because she is ignored in the textual analysis by men of erudition. Why do they not ask, “Who do these women represent and what symbolism do they offer the story?” Not to mention, the only other woman mentioned in this story turns out to be a deaf mute. As this fictional story would have it, both women are deficient in some capacity and unable to communicate effectively. What symbolism do these facts hold?
Let’s compare the nature of the invisible electromagnetic frequency assaults and subsequent psychotronic torture. In these cases where both men and women claim to be targeted individuals of electronic stalking, there exists a narrative that completely renders these individuals as invisible, mute, and impotent beings. Oddly, as the the same medium these very real invisible assaults carry with them. This method of creating a realistic invisible, mute, and impotent person is the simple task of labeling the individuals with terms grouping them “mentally ill,” “alcoholic” or simply “mad.” In other words, just call them “crazy,” “who would believe them?” and, apparently, this would be enough for the story to be believable and taken as accepted Truth. If we refer to Felman’s analysis of Honore de Balzac’s work “Adieu,” we find this mad woman (Stephanie) is relegated by masculine discourse to the edge of non-existence, since the male pedagogical commentary by Pierre Gascar and Philippe Berthier in the published work cited from 1974 fail to analysis her presence in the story what so ever. Apparently being “mad” and woman was a given attribute based on one’s biological gender at birth.
With regard to Plato and his Cave metaphor, a similar occurrence happens. The fecund womb of maternity (the symbolic mother) becomes silenced and instead rendered as an inanimate object, and one without a speakable voice, she is silenced and denied a position from speakable discourse. This becomes part of the unconscious textual metaphor and the unspeakable known. That the people carrying out these electronic transgressions against my feminine body may very well be dealing with their own “spectral mother,” a ghostlike object of simultaneous fascination and dread. These facts, only solidify the fact Freud himself was unable to confront his own powerful mother in his theory. He gave us only the father-son relationship. It would be Melanie Klein that would give us the Mother-Child relationship and one that mirrors Freud’s foundation of loss.
I suspect the reason the absence of the mother remained in theory so long, her body erased from conscious thought is that when woman enter womanhood, and their by pregnancy, woman has become signified by the phallus. Her growing bulging belly ever that reminder of that signification. Thus, as mother “her influence is regressive, her personality childlike and even hostile to culture.” She, herself, in pregnancy and motherhood has broken the bond to her own mother by becoming a mother herself, and has not broken the bond to her father, because woman marries father’s surrogate. His nom de pere. Thus, the baby becomes her finally acquired penis. She becomes the same overwhelming presence ever dreaded by men. She becomes castrating father but as mother. This is the same psychotic text of Western culture but on the feminine vertical. Madeline Sprengnether, in her book “The Spectral Mother: Freud, Feminism, and Psychoanalysis” writes:
“Like the process of mourning, the developmental process that leads the child away from its mother internalizes an absence, so that the subsequent achievements that Freud attributes to the successful passage through the Oedipus and castration complexes appear to rest on a quicksand of loss. Undermined from within, phallic masculinity, the cornerstone of patriarchal culture, is thus inherently unstable.”
Finally acquiring the phallus through motherhood via the birth of baby, in all actuality completes the woman. However, she seems to present to the child a ghostlike function, creating a presence out of an absence. This effect is called spectral because she haunts the house of Oedipus. “Where is Jocasta?” The spirit of the mournful and unmourned Jocasta.
Nancy J. Chodorow (2012). Individualizing Gender and Sexuality: Theory and Practice. New York. Routledge.
Shoshana Felman (1993). What Does Woman Want: Reading and Sexual Difference. Baltimore, Maryland, The John Hopkins University Press.
Lucy Holmes (2008). The Internal Triangle: Theories of Female Development. New York. Jason Aronson.
Amber Jacobs (2007). On Matricide: Myth, Psychoanalysis, and the Law of the Mother. New York. Columbia University Press.
Madeline Sprengnether (1990). The Spectral Mother. New York. Cornell University Press.
Michelle Boulous Walker (1998). Philosophy of the maternal body: Reading silence. New York. Routledge.
“Les principles de la taxation resent les memes, seils les seuils d’assejettissement a l’impot sont legerement modifies.”
“The principles of taxation remain the same, only the tax liability threshold are slightly modified.”
For Michel Foucault the process by which one becomes a subject is through assujetissement (which also translates to liability) one losses their autonomy to a power only to become a subject which implies a radical dependency on that power. This is Foucault’s premise in his book “Discipline and Punish”. In “Discipline and Punish” the process of becoming a subject takes place centrally through the humanbody. The prisoner’s body becomes a sign of guilt and transgression, as the embodiment of prohibition and the sanction for rituals of normalization. However, the subject is formed through a discursive matrix as a juridical subject.
In the process of contract stalking with electromagnetic frequency assaults and torture, there is a set of pre-existing conditions. The two previous mentioned is a label of non-valuable status, as a “life not worth living” and a method of operation as “a power over.” I happen to call it “an abusive power over.” The third existing condition manifests as a “liability” (assujetissement) owed to a Lord in which the “subject” becomes the “bonded or bondsman.
If the targeted individuals are in the process of becoming (that is, being formed) as a result of the pre-existing discursive constituted identity as a “prisoner” to some Lord, what exactly constitutes “the prisoner’s identity.” That is to say, what makes the prisoner flawed, and in this “flawed” and lacking state what liability does the targeted individual (“the bondsman”) owe to “the Lord?”
Historically, during the Victorian era, therapeutic rape was enforced and even given as a prescription for wonton, wayward women who refused to listen to their husbands. My testimony is this, being electronically targeted is nothing short of sexual assault and being raped. The tensions that are placed upon my body violate boundaries no person has any right to touch, let alone take with a physical force. My feminine resistance to a predominantly masculine discourse (violence) does not warrant my resignification process as a mute being too sick to speak because of a “feminine flawed being.” For if this is the masculine discourse, were not all females borned flawed for lack of a penis?
“What is a woman?” I can tell you what a woman is not. A woman is not the behavioral characteristic attributes that sexually violate other females. That, makes up a large portion of masculine discourse that victim blame the woman for her “feminine flawed nature.” The feminine knows what it means to be sexually violated. The liability I owe seems to be rooted in being female/feminine.
A quick recap of the pre-existing conditions that contribute to the targeted individual:
1. A label of non-valuable status, a life deemed not worth living. This can include, but is not limited to: mentally ill, the physically disabled, prostitute, drug addicted, alcoholic, Jew, Christian, Democrat, elderly, and mentally retarded.
2. A stronger political “power over” the subject which tends to be an “abusive power over” and to which has made its presence known through electronics targeted physical assaults and psychotropic torture.
3. “A liability” to this stronger political power which is done through the process of forming a subject through the centralized use of the subject’s body and mind as discussed by Michel Foucault in his book “Discipline and Punish.”
Interesting, as history would have it, women and madness went hand and hand. Women, like children, were treated as “inferior”. In the Victorian era, it was common to see wives incarcerated in psychiatric wards for not complying with their husband’s wishes. In the early 1990s, more women than men were represented in greater numbers as involved in “careers” as psychiatric patients. Shoshana Felman, in her book “What Does A Woman Want?: Reading and Sexual Difference”, discuss the notion of a “female psychology” conditioned by an oppressive and patriarchal male culture. Phyllis Chester, in her book “Women and Madness”, also writes, “It is clear that for a woman to be healthy she must “adjust” to and accept the behavioral norms for her sex even though these kinds of behavior are generally regarded as less socially desirable … The ethic of mental health is masculine in our culture.”
Women are conditioned by family and social upbringing and subsequent development to exist for serving an image, an authority that is central and is man. This is why both targeted individuals and trans gender populations are scrutinized with a vengeance. It is because both step outside the mainstream socially acceptable stereotype of their otherwise “deranged predicament”. But this stepping neither makes them “mad” nor “insane” as their voice in language and a philosophical discourse must be allowed to be heard. It is called feminism.
Here is the thing about targeted individuals, oppressed trans gender people, the “mentally ill” and young children. “Depressed and terrified women are not about to seize the means of production and reproduction: quite the opposite of rebellion, madness is the impasse confronting those whom cultural conditioning has deprived them the very means of protest or self-affirmation.” That is to say, they are denied their right to feminine resistance by a larger power that seeks to control and dominate them. For the targeted individual, this power takes the form of electromagnetic frequency assaults and torture. As a lesser tradition of specialized torture, extremely low levels of electromagnetic frequency are utilized or some other form of energy that resides on the electromagnetic spectrum. Some have called it the Moscow signal, others Havana syndrome. And the individuals, for suffering these “imaginary assaults,” they are deemed “mentally ill” or “mad”. They are told that what is happening to them is “imaginary”.
The Psychic Life of Power
“According to the formulation of subjection as both the subject and becoming of the subject, power is, as subordination, a set of conditions that precedes the subject, effecting and subordinating the subject from the outside,” writes Judith Butler in her book “The Psychic Life of Power: Theories in Subjection.” That is to say, those who find themselves as targeted individuals must possess a specific set of conditions that precedes the onset of targeting. Similar to the five (5) vulnerabilities of cyber security, there seems to be an inherited set of conditions, pre-existing. What they are, I have not teased out fully, even in my own life but I will say a label of “non-valuable” status is one such element of vulnerability for the targeted individual. That is to say, you have been deemed “a life NOT WORTH living.” I suppose the second element is an “abusive power over” and this “abusive power” not only acts on the subject but, in transitive sense, enacts the subject into being or becoming, even if that becoming is a deadening of their very life, itself a commodity to be purchased and discarded. Power is the effect on the subject. The question then becomes, “When did this power first present itself? Because a condition does not enable or enact without first becoming present.
Contrary to what this philosophical line of thought would follow, I did not will this abusive torture on myself, this defies Freud’s Pleasure Principle and man’s desire to elude pain and suffering. It is the product of a very masculine discourse known as victim blaming. It is that driving force of the Id to relieve itself of discomfort which includes hunger, thirst, and defecation. So any action that prevents the onset of continued pain, including taking a rest from rigorous work as seen in sleeping and resting.