“Vengeance is practiced, outside of laws or rights, in the form of aggressions that may or may not be preconcerted. Thus a sort of international vendetta is set-up, present more or less everywhere, which disorients the female populace, the groups and micro-societies which are in the process of being formed. Real murders take place as part of it, but also (insofar as they can be distinguished) cultural murders, murders of the mind, emotions and intelligence.” ~Luce Irigaray’s thoughts on the slippage between murder of self and soul
As a woman, one of the greatest pleasure I found was in cultivating and caring for garden plants. But through the use of electronic assaults I was made ill. My garden space and yard space were an important aspect of my identity and who I considered myself to be as a woman. The germination and care in maintaining angiosperms and fruit-producing plants was my therapy. In the complex power of an abusive relationship, I did not earn my own money. Dependent and in service to others is the role typically played by women. As a result, I am economically insecure. The items I purchased to care for this garden via an American Express credit card, a bill I did not pay for myself, fell under the category of “Yard Maintenance” in the domestic care of a home. A home I do not own. Little did I know this act would earn me the dissemination of my garden space through an act of passive-aggressive violence. When it became apparent, through the act of silencing me via electronic assault (I am the voice of a targeted individual), I could no longer care for the garden and yard space. My sister and my brother-in-law, the ones responsible for paying the American Express credit card bill, came and tore almost every plant out of my garden last summer. Everything except for a sage bush which I germinated from a seed, and which I paid for myself when my son was very small. All other perennial herbs and fruit-producing plants were either trashed or re-located elsewhere. If I did not buy the plant, I did not own it. Therefore, under Hegel’s philosophy of Lordship and Bondage, the bondsman made her mark and then, through the Lord, it was re-written. This included my favorite spring-time ground cover, a billowy, fluffy cover of purple phlox, a climbing clematis flowering plant, perennial lemon thyme, the perennial herb thyme, chives, mint, fennel, and a blueberry bush. As I salvaged my blueberry bush from the pile of debris my brother-in-law and my sister started to collect as they tore out my garden, my brother-in-law instructed my sister to “tell me.” My sister then turned to me and in a nasty tone of voice said, “Why you can’t take care of it!”
I also have a medical need to manage my blood sugar, blood pressure, and weight. I have a family history of hypertension, type 2 diabetes, kidney disease, heart disease, lung disease, and cancer. It is no surprise that I became “pre-diabetic.” My kidneys are at risk of developing the onset of disease from my diabetic condition. The increase in my blood pressure contributes to a higher risk of acquiring kidney disease. I am an asthmatic as well. Routine exercise helps my pulmonary system and assists with more fluid breathing. My insurance company covered the cost of a blood pressure monitor. However, the blood sugar monitor, in addition to three herbal supplements that support lower blood sugar, were purchased on the American Express card. Keep in mind, a card I don’t pay for this card’s bill. Does this ‘flashy’ American Express credit card represent the cultural symbolic of “white female privilege?” I often use this credit card in retail stores that employ black cashiers. Do I represent the “white privileged class?” I wonder how they will “tear-out” from my body these ingested supplements that are from the “white privilege class?” Although I’m not sure of the person(s)’ identity who is trying to “speak” to me through the veil, I do know the classical, historical, profile of male patterned dominance and oppression over women. Sometimes, though, I believe these people are from the black urban population. A population that is rich and dense in Trenton, New Jersey. And this black urban population most likely perceives me as a “white spoiled female” from the “white privilege” class. Could this be the symbolic of the very large black patio umbrella my brother-in-law Rick and his brother gave to me? I don’t’ know? But it represented some type of symbolic. I wonder too, about the symbolism involved in their leaving for a Caribbean vacation on “Fat Tuesday” and the onslaught of electronic signals that inflicted pain and suffering which contributed to my personal weight gain? Please consider the link below entitled “Deviant Desires: The Fetish Fantasy of Body Inflation and Expansion.” Philosophically speaking, this would register in the “symbolic imaginary” of deviant sexual desires of body inflation fantasies in the foreclosed psychotic and the anal-sadistic universe.
The personality that is trying to talk to me through the veil which hides their identity so well, while providing them the comfort and safety of hurting another human being and getting away with it, expresses male-patterned abusive dominance. Typically not the approach women seek when resorting to violence. In fact, the entire conception of electronic abuse and electronic assault and the “electronic human target” can be perceived as male patterned behavior in nature. Please refer to the tactics used to “silence” victims by gangs and mafias and the late 19th-century male’s portrayal of the female in symbolic images and art.
The silencing of my garden space was a direct attack at hurting me psychologically and emotionally. It is not clear if the person who is targeting me with electronic attacks is a neighbor, a past acquaintance, a family member, or a network of all three. But, it was not a surprise they targeted some of my favorite plants with removal. I had ‘voiced’ my fondness for these individual plants to both my sister and my brother-in-law, but also to a personal family relative, my biological brother. My neighbors knew as well how much I loved my garden as they would often see me outside my home doing yard work and gardening. My garden lite up at night. And, from behind my house, in the parking lot of the local American Legion bar post 458 located on Michigan Avenue, you could see my garden glow. My neighbors knew it was the light of maternal care and perseverance. The garden is a symbolic image of the maternal life-giving force of the womb, her power of the procreative through strength and perseverance.
Ripping that which one loves, right out of the life of the intended target has been a strategic tactic in abusive relationships as well as criminal relationships. Making a mother suffer by making her witness and watch the systematic abuse and torture of her children has been part of the technology of coercive control. I considered all my young seedlings and plants I cared for, my children. Child abuse is tangential to spousal abuse. This begs the question, “What kind of power is control?” And what gender usually wields power over the “inferior sex?” And let’s remember that children are also perceived as “inferior beings.” Men, that’s who. And men who possess a paranoid fear of loss of control over others are not above the most heinous, insidious mentalities to inflict harm on others. These are the mentalities possessed by some organized crime syndicate leaders as the fractured fault lines of masculinity. Please refer to my post “The Fragilities and Fault Lines of Masculinity.” As a result, fear surrounding possible death and torture may silence many individuals into the darkest recess of anonymity.
What is “the silent garden” symbolic of? What can we infer from this silencing and denial of the “garden” brought forth by physical electronic assault? Michelle Boulous Walker in her book “Philosophy of the Maternal Body: Reading silence” points to Michele Le Doeuff’s reference to the “shameful face of philosophy” which “alludes to the fact that philosophy is unable to recognize its dependence upon the images or metaphors that it plunders from an imaginary outside.” Le Doeuff’s book “Philosophy of the Imaginary” speaks of this as the “internal scandal” of philosophy, “its inability to fathom its own inclusory and exclusory devices.” We can infer from the silencing brought about by electromagnetic assault and torture, that a supposedly male-dominant ‘voice’ was ‘speaking’ to me through the imaginary symbolic of symbolism. Through the veil, this ‘voice’ without a face, sought to silence the “active” female part of my symbolic act of maternal nurture, the act of gardening, by assigning me to a position of muted interiority. Since lawn maintenance is “active” “masculine” “outside work,” this ‘voice’ slipped curiously into the realm of moral philosophy to address the question, “What ‘space’ is appropriately assigned to the feminine gender?” Le Doeuff exposes an 18th-century masculine ideological dated 1777 functioning to reducing women to the “voiceless void” and “inactive passivity” often discussed by feminist philosophers and also expressed by Freud as the “passive inside work of the domestic.” Le Doeuff’s exploration of the philosophical imaginary traces an elision of woman and muted interiority in this 18th century text of a physician. Le Deouff discovers the echo of an imaginary femininity embedded in a philosophical tradition that can only be labelled phallocratic. This same echo can be heard in the ‘voice’ without a face that promoted my muted interiority and silenced my active masculinity. Please refer to my post “In the Shadow of Silence: The pedagogy of shame.” The inactivity brought on my electromagnetic assault furthered the development of a mature female self, one that has historically been associated with fertility. Please refer to “The Venus of Wilendorf” and its association with fertility and harvest. Please refer to the above-referenced link “Deviant Desires: The Fetish Fantasy of Body Inflation and Expansion” which provides images of these symbolic relics.
Anthropologists have acknowledged one of the most common kinds of “silencing” among women as being done in “strategic opposition” to women’s ‘voice’ and own sense of personal authority and female development. The divine voice of the maternal plays a part in individual paranoid fears surrounding childbirth. As a result, many pregnant females have been permanently silenced into death by their abusive male counterparts. Thus, violence and jealousy play a part in domestic violence and the battering of women by their male partners. When a batterer brings a litany of complaints about a woman’s failures to the table, (s)he is expressing something of which the woman is also painfully aware – that the very “invisible” thing that is attacking her does not meet her needs or desired sense for a standard for care of which she feels entitle and deserves which is the basic respect for human life. No matter how outrageous and phantastical the man’s accusations against the woman he targets, they never, under normal, logical, and reasonable circumstances pan out to his paranoid delusional fantasies of her. She is an “alcoholic.” She is a “whore.” She is a “witch.” Is she really an “alcoholic?” Is she really a “whore?” Is she really a “monster?” Or is she just being made out to be one? Perhaps she is expressing a posture in defense of her own self rights and needs. Perhaps refusing to acquiesce to his demands? Demands that express demeaning and derogatory speech, “You need to get out!” “Attend to my needs or leave,” “If you don’t like it, there’s the door” or “I’m gonna need you to go on disability to help out with the finances?” Phrases that all ‘voice’ the needs of the other and does not address the needs of the woman being abusively targeted. These phrases are markers of an abusive relationship. These phrases make me believe the people responsible for hurting me need me to earn “free” money while they attempt to “dumb me down” and “one-up me” with physical electronic assaults to my body and mind. In an attempt to keep me financially dependent and economically insecure, electronic assault would facilitate the onset of mental instability and disability and serve the two-fold purpose of making me a slave (someone’s “bitch slap”) while providing money to help maintain a house I will never own. So why are they hiding their faces? Who is it that uses tactics of pain and suffering via electronic assault, while providing no avenue to alleviate the pain and suffering that promote silence and FEMICIDE?
Electronic assaults can not be seen like physical assaults, and in that sense, they are very different. With a physical assault, you can see your perpetrator coming at you. You usually can visibly discern race, nationality, hair color, skin tone, eye color, facial hair, weight, height, body build, and color of clothing. With electronic assault, you CAN NOT SEE the perpetrator. You CAN NOT SEE the person that is coming after you! This renders the assault in the realm of the “symbolic imaginary.” The symbolic imaginary can only be understood in terms of language and discourse, voice and speech in the symbolism of psychoanalytic philosophy. As a result, these circumstances are ripe for “gaslighting” games.
Soldiers who fight on the front-lines of war (and females who suffer domestic violence and physical assault) have a tendency to abuse substances like alcohol and drugs. Why would use electronic assault on individuals who have a tendency to abuse substances like alcohol? There is only one reason why someone would want to use electronic assault on individuals who have a tendency to abuse substances like alcohol. And that reason is to further their continued substance abuse. It is not being used to “help the individual.” These individuals already have difficulty coping with the stressors of physical abuse. AGAIN, the technologies and devices that contribute and play a part in the physical electronic assault of human beings are part of a language. A language that expresses and perpetuates male-patterned dominance and abuse.
Although the use of experimental clandestine eavesdropping technologies that are implanted into the body to stalk victims has yet to be fully defined by federal statute, establishing it as illegal, and while this fact remains true, I propose the federal government remains complicit to these activities, activities that breach and violate citizens’ personal privacy and constitutional rights through acts of cyber-invasion using remote broadcast radio frequency (RF) and geo-pole location magnetic technologies that register as cyberstalking. The following statutes define these activities as a crime are as follows:
“Title 18, United States Code, Section 2261A is the federal stalking statute. Section 2261A(1) covers in-person stalking and Section 2261A(2) covers cyberstalking— stalking that occurs using Internet or telephones—as well as stalking that occurs using the mail. Section 2261(2), originally enacted as part of the Violence Against Women Act of 2005, has two main provisions—Subsections (A) and (B).”
• Both provisions require that the defendant act with the intent to kill, injure, harass, intimidate, or place under surveillance with intent to kill, injure, harass, or intimidate another person.
• Both provisions also require the use of the mail, any interactive computer service or electronic communication service or electronic communication system of interstate commerce, or any other facility of interstate or foreign commerce. Usually, this element is met with the use of the Internet.
• Both provisions also require that the defendant engaged in a course of conduct, meaning more than one act.
Subsection (A) further requires that the course of conduct places the victim in reasonable fear of the death of, or serious bodily injury to, the victim, the victim’s spouse or intimate partner, or to an immediate family member of the victim. Subsection (B) requires instead that the course of conduct causes, attempts to cause, or would be reasonably expected to cause substantial emotional distress to the victim or the victim’s immediate family.
The statute previously required that the victim and the perpetrator be in separate jurisdictions, making the statute inapplicable in a number of stalking cases. A significant amendment to the cyberstalking statute was passed in 2013, which eliminated this requirement. The penalties available for violating section 2261A, contained in section 2261(b), range from a maximum of five years to a maximum of life where stalking results in death of the victim. For a discussion of the first case prosecuted under the “cyberstalking resulting in death” provision, see Jamie M. McCall and Shawn A. Weede, United States v. Matusiewicz: Lessons Learned From the First Federal Prosecution of Cyberstalking Resulting in Death, UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS’ BULLETIN (May 2016).
For a detailed discussion of 19 United States Code § 2261A(2), see Edward McAndrew, Say Hello to My Little Friend: The New and Improved Federal Cyberstalking Statute, USA Bulletin (Jan.2014); Margaret Groban, Intimate Partner Cyberstalking — Technology as a Dangerous Tool to Stalk, Instill Fear and Create Serious Danger to Intimate Partners, UNITED STATES ATTORNEYS’ BULLETIN (May 2016).