Invisible Chains: Coercive control and how new technological innovations are abusing and entrapping people in everyday life
“The domestic violence field faces a similar predicament when it tries to account for how battered women behave without identifying their “cage” …. the cage remains invisible as long as we omit the strategic intelligence that complements these acts with structural constraints and organizes them into the patterns of oppression that give them political meaning.” (1) pg. 198
I would like to open my discussion today about the coercive control of men over female bodies. But this is not just about women, although it is men who primarily victimize women, this is about clandestine technological victimization of people through implants that work on wireless radio waves signals. I would like to integrate into this discussion of coercion the use of advanced technologies that have been developed for mastery and control over the human body and to note the element of boundary violations in man’s attempts to master and control a subject. Men, for centuries, have tried to conquer and manage their death in terms of its prevention, curing, and thwarting progressive symptoms of disease. Some of these new technologies developed in modern medicine run off of radio frequency signals. The same strategies that doctors use to prevent, cure, and stymie progressive disease symptoms are the same types of strategies abusive men use over their partners in response to thwarting the dreaded death drive in support of the life drive. The death drive is one of the three fundamental drives Sigmund Freud hypothesized about which include also the sex drive. These drives in the human psyche can create unconscious repetitive behaviors that become maladaptive to everyday living. The roots of these unconscious behaviors are cloaked in delusions, fantasies, and myths. It is these maladaptive repetitive behaviors that do not serve us well when it comes to our intimate partner relationships and can be very one-sided in that they do not consider the other person as a speaking subject in her own right, with her own wishes, and own autonomy. I use the pronoun “she” but it could just as well be “he” as we are a gender-fluid and presumably inclusive society and perversions rooted in the primal scene are part of a growing social diversity. It totally forecloses upon the subject’s position in the argument and completely closes down any discussion that may produce fruitful negotiations where both parties may benefit.
“To identify an active, aggressive woman with Truth is to defy a very long tradition that identifies strong females with deception and virtuous females, including muses, with gentle inactivity.” ~Alicia Ostriker, “The Thieves of Language: Women Poets and Revisionist Mythmaking.”
Coercive control over women is seen in the personalities of abusive men over their wives, intimate partners, and children. It can also be observed in women, in their everyday interaction with co-workers, friends, business associates. It has been seen in police interrogations, political leadership, religious leadership, as well in the everyday interactions with abusive individuals who must maintain control and dominance at all costs in order to prevent annihilation from the death drive. The scope of this discussion will focus on the coercive control of advanced technology over human beings in domestic battery and domestic violence situations. One of the aspects of coercion in intimate partner relationships is known as microsurveillance. Microsurveillance is described as:
“….to detect disobedience or disloyalty, they may survey the minute facets of a woman’s everyday conduct in ways that are inseparable from the microregulation unique to coercive control, targeting not merely where they go, but how fast they drive, or how much money they spend, entering everyday routines in ways that obliterate autonomy. This type of surveillance injects fear even into such perfunctory choices as whom they ask for directions or which route they take home as well as when they arrive, until choice itself becomes frightening. Intimate surveillance extends from going through drawers, pocketbooks, diaries, or closets to monitoring time, phone calls, bank accounts, checkbooks, and stealing identity, using global positioning devices (cyber-stalking), or installing video cameras to track or monitor a partner’s movement. Surveillance is almost universal in abusive relationships. Eight-five percent of the women in the Tolman study and over 90% of the English women reported that their abusive partner monitored their time, for instance. Particularly in combination with microregulation, microsurveillance gives coercive control an intensiveness found in no other form of oppression. “(1)
Surveillance makes intimidation portable. It is at this place in my discussion that I would like to reflect on my previous post about the military’s transition in new technological innovations. Our US government has a direct interest in advanced project research. In fact, the Defense Advanced Research Project Agency (DARPA) supports universities, large companies, and small companies in their research, if their research will produce beneficial technologies that our military can monopolize upon. DARPA is working to develop and promote artificial intelligence (AI) for its beneficial uses and Google has signed on with DARPA in some advanced research projects. (2)(3) If you think about our smartphones, they run on Android systems. Part of Android systems is something call Google Play Services. Google Play Services grants permissions to Android Systems in accessing Body Sensors, Calendar, Camera, Contacts, Microphone, Phone, SMS (text messages), and Storage. Understanding that Body Sensors are sensors that are worn outside the body to monitor internal biological rhythms like heart rate, pulse, (Fitbit) even blood sugar (continuous glucose monitoring), the questions become, “Could Google be working with the military on biological implanted sensors that can be remotely accessed using an Android phone? Or has some rouge computer scientist discovered a way to clandestinely imbed software into a phone via the Google Play Store and access these implants in unsuspecting citizens?” Since devices can not only be worn outside the body, they can also be implanted inside the body, it is very reasonable to think that new technologies associated with implanted devices in experimental medicine (e.g., sensors) as well as other types of implants that could be used to access a person’s body remotely via Android systems through Google Play Services. It’s interesting to note that sensor diagnostics are used in modern-day automobiles with navigational “On-Star” systems linked to satellites. How these two might potentially be connected raises an interesting question; can this technology provide the very real possibility of giving a rouge agent access to another’s body and motor vehicle through remote monitoring. These new projects could also touch upon aspects of mind control and coercion of a human subject through remote clandestine rouge operations as well as eves dropping aspects that can be used to monitor behavior. Eves dropping issues have been reported in some published news reports as a potential problem with the android technology known as Alexa as well as new Smartphones and laptops that can “talk” and “listen” to our voices. This is the scenario I have theorized regarding my own personal victimization with what many individuals have described as targeting, mind control, and gang stalking. In a court of law, or as an adversarial argument to its detrimental possibilities this is purely speculation and is insightful in knowing how new advancing technologies may be moving individuals into an uncertain future with regard to privacy, safety, and protection of our 4th amendment rights.
The type of microsurveillance I have encountered and endured attempts to microregulate my behavior according to my perpetrator’s wishes and desires. This is accomplished by inducing electromagnetic fields that make a subject feel ill. When the individual performs the desired action, the electric current is turned off and the subject receives relief from the torture of the electromagnetic field. The period of relief does not last long and the cycle of control and dominance continues as the other person maintains absolute reign through surveillance over the subject by monitoring their activity. So, for example, the perpetrator may want me to stop using my computer. This could be accomplished in a few different ways. One, outfitted with tracking technology, my computer can be remotely accessed and located through a location finder. It can be either shut down, or they can make my online experience unpleasant and difficult for me by slowing down my computer system when they notice computer activity. GPS type tracking can be installed in my laptop computer, software that can activate an alert system, thereby alerting my perpetrators to my online or offline activity. Working with a slow computer system makes accomplishing a task very difficult and wastes precious time. Sensors implanted in the body can be activated wirelessly through a similar alert system and turn on or off via an electromagnetic field (radio frequency). So when I sit down in front of my computer laptop and turn it on the software alerts a third-party viewer. This is also done over my cell phone too with a type of Google tracking I previously described when Google Play Services interacts with Android Systems. I have noticed a decrease in electronic targeting if I do not sign in to my Google Gmail or connect my cell phone to Google Play Services. Also, when new “updates” occur over my cellphone when it is connected to Google Play Services, updates that allow me the use of even more features, immediately I have been located, my device finder turned on through the Google update and electronic targeting starts all over again. In addition, jamming devices might be used to intervene in computer operations and jam cell phone transmission. As far as targeting goes inside my house, this has also been accomplished. If the perpetrator wants you to physically move from one room to the next, and I believe this might be part of some type of gang stalking device, where the perpetrator has installed sensors or monitors that pick-up on movement. The electromagnetic field will be turned on, which in turn may force the subject to move away from its original position, say the living room to the basement. The signal fades or is either turned off as the subject changes location and moves farther away from the source. I have had this technology turned on when attempting to cut my grass and maintain an orderly lawn. I have had it turned on during crucially needed exercise sessions (I’m a diabetic) in the privacy of my own home which exercise is beneficial behavior aimed at maintaining wellness and good health. I have had it turned on when attempting to detail an account of my own abuses, thereby impeding cognition and scattering my thoughts. I have it turned on when I try to create new blog post articles about abnormal psychology and perverse deviant behaviors and unfair practices in medicine.
The direct consequences of microsurveillance can be dramatic. If a victim fails to accommodate her abuser’s “house rules” they may be made to endure an evening of cursing and screaming, or she may be denied privileges like visits with friends and/or the use of the car. This tight scrutiny turns some abused women into recluses as one of the aims of a batterer is alienation. In my personal experience, I have been made to endure long bouts of torture throughout the day and night, making everyday living difficult. I blame this technology for the onset of my weight gain. One of the obvious dramatic results of abuse may be seen in the physical appearance of the victim. The victim may physically appear uncared for, may have gained weight, and look disheveled, may have bruises, scars, or burns. Whereas before she became a victim of abuse, she maintained her weight and appearance well. This could also be a direct result of the technology being turned directly against her at night while she sleeps, waking her up and disrupting her sleep pattern or it is turned on during daily routines making it difficult for her to make accomplishments and create goals. The common symbolic theme is a theme of “disruption, disruption, disruption” in the production of invisible chaos. These “disruptions” have their origins with the onset of low-level frequency vibrations I receive to my lower body while sleeping and to which I have been awoken during my sleep repeatedly at night. These attacks have also turned on frequency in my head, which has caused me to feel discomfort. These attacks against the female body are routed in primal scene fantasy and can not only be explained through psychoanalysis but can also be explained through the philosophy of silence. Plato’s cave metaphor explains the philosophy of silence in which he disfigures the maternal body with his cave metaphor, rendering the fecund woman as an “oppressive place men seek escape” thereby denying the female body a voice within the domain of philosophy.
“Noelle Neumann suggested that silencing minorities usually happens by using social innuendos and non-verbal cues about the “right” opinion, her work does not rule out the possibility that some times social pressure may take a more active form with people supporting or even taking action to silence voices of disagreement.” (4) Neumann (p. 82) noted Rousseau wrote about a special tribunal, “the Censor,” that never existed, but that censorship is an important element in public opinion that preserves manners and morals by preventing opinions from growing corrupt and by hindering the dissemination of corrupted ideas (Rousseau, 153, pp. 140–141). (5) (6)
We might analyze the actions of the angry mob that stormed the White House and the violence that ensued after a Trump rally. The actions taken by US citizens that utilized violent aggression as a means to settle a perceived dispute suffered by the mobsters demonstrate how the “silencing” of corrupted ideas has been handled by the federal government. Destruction of property, violating personal boundaries through physical assault, and breaking and entering a protected federal complex while proclaiming threats to kill and harm innocent people is not how civilized people handle disputes. It is how people without a sound logical argument settle a dispute through the use of violence because they are lacking in the capacity to formulate a sound and rational argument based on a philosophical debate. Its method is quick and easy versus long and arduous.
I propose the rouge clandestine attacks of US citizens through gang stalking and targeting violence and the use of electronic assaults are part of the same subculture that stormed the White House. The silencing of groups and their unfavorable opinions can be observed in many cultures and under various conditions. During the civil rights movement, many whites wanted to silence every Negro who had the courage to stand up and fight for their rights. In the modern history of war, we witnessed the German Holocaust, the genocide of Serbs by the Ustashe, the genocide of the Bosniaks and Croats by the Chetniks, Bangladesh genocide, East Timor genocide, the Cambodian genocide, Guatemalan genocide, Anfal genocide, Rwandan genocide, Bosnian genocide, and the list goes on.
The racial tensions in America have not changed with yet more killings of young black people amidst the backdrop of COVID Lockdown. What we are witnessing in the phenomenon of the electronically targeted individual and the targeted individual suffering gang stalking is no different, albeit may not be based on racial or ethnic differences, but rather just conflict itself. In studying criminology, I learned sociologists have analyzed inner-city populations to understand how values and norms contribute to violence and the manifestation of violent subcultures. I propose there is an organized subculture that is clandestine (invisible like the mafia and the KKK) that utilizes violence as means to settle individual disputes or perceived wrongdoing through clandestine attacks. This subculture that utilizes violence is also utilizing advancing technology to do so and possesses a “mafia mentality” in the use of their ideological motivated violence.
There is an obvious element of sadistic pleasure a perpetrator derives in the degradation of punishing and abusing their victims:
“Controlling men establish their moral superiority by degrading and denying self-respect to their partners, a violation of what Drucilla Cornell calls “the degradation prohibition.” (7) According to philosopher John Rawls, self-respect is a “primary good” without which “nothing may seem worth doing, or if some things have value for us, we lack the will to strive for them. All desire and activity become empty and vain, and we sink into apathy and cynicism.” (8) (1)
A person who is being abused may report feeling “dead inside”, and this sentiment illustrates how important self-respect is to the personhood of an individual.
“Emotional abuse is particularly harmful in the context of a primary dependence, as when a parent degrades a child, when survival depends on approval, alternative sources of support are unavailable, and when the object of degradation is deeply invested in how the other feels about them (as well as in their judgment) and is unable to muster positive self-talk or other forms of resiliency to counter negative messages. The adult victim of coercive control is in no sense childlike. But the tactics used in coercive control can so disable a woman’s capacity to affirm her femininity that she mimics a childlike dependence on approval that significantly amplifies the effect of insults.” (1)
At this point in the discussion, I would like to detail the name-calling I have endured. Words like “whore” and “stupid,” along with malignant narcissist phrases like, “Look at her. She can’t do nothing about it.” Using the term “it” as a reference to the stalking, gang stalking, surveillance, microsurveillance, and electronic torture I have endured. The phrase, “You were nothing but his whore!” Are all testaments to voices that possess victim blaming mentalities that persist in mainstream thinking today. Ideologies that have monopolized on the victims’ past sexual histories that seek to place responsibility on to victims and allow sexual perpetrators to elude responsibility for any wrongdoing and to which has had a history in state law. This mentality has served mainstream patriarchy and has allowed for the continuation of brutal sexual assaults and promoted femicide. In the history of law, early childhood physical and sexual abuse, in the case histories of sexual assault victims, was permissible evidence at trial. They were known as “promiscuity laws,” and these laws prevented the victim of sexual assault any rights to prosecute the perpetrator if her past history revealed she suffered physical and sexual abuse in childhood. Phrases like, “She deserved to be beaten,” and “She deserves to be raped,” reveal the myth-making mentality that physical assault and rape are viable solutions, perhaps even “therapeutic solution” to unwise action, outspoken voice, or choice on the part of the female victim, or even perhaps the solution as a cure to her “deviant mental illness.” (9) (10)
Insults and put-downs are effective in coercive control because they play off complementary forms of deprivation, intimidation, and control that disable a victim’s capacity to respond and stand up for herself. It also facilitates the creation of self-doubt, as the victim questions her own perceptions and abilities. Targeting areas of female gender identity where the partner’s self-confidence may already be poor, the use of coercive control as a tactic for disabling a woman’s capacity to affirm her femininity utilizes forms of violence to establish the superiority of the abuser. As a result of the abuse, she may become alienated and withdrawn. Compromised by such forms of violence, the victim may feel helpless and without the necessary power to overcome such abuses. (1)
Shaming is another tool in the toolbox of abusive men and male batterers. “In shaming, perpetrators of coercive control demonstrate a victim’s subservience through marking or the enforcement of a behavior or ritual that is either intrinsically humiliating or is contrary to her nature, morality, or best judgment. In a perverse inversion of the 1950s high school practice in which girls proudly wore rings or letter jackets to signify their “trophy boyfriends,” abusive men have forced women in [reported] caseloads to bear tattoos, bites, burns, and similar marks of ownership visible to others.
Markings signify that a man has a personal interest in this woman that he will defend. But it also signifies she is vulnerable to exploitation or further abuse by others. Because of its link to ownership, marking often becomes a source of self-loathing and can prompt suicide attempts. Although there is no study evidence on this practice, it is so common that the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (NCADV) and the American Academy of Facial, Plastic, and Reconstructive Surgery have developed a jointly run free program for removing tattoos and other scars inflicted on battered women and their children by abusers.” (1)
It is important to link the importance of body weight and physical appearance in the “marking” of a female in ownership by abusive men. Weight gain and diminished physical appearance are a by-product of not only the microregulation and microsurveillance, but also of degradation, and shaming of the victim. Bodily disfigurement furthers erodes a woman’s self-confidence and confuses her autonomy and self-identity with aspects the batterer imposes on her. In the case of the triumphant haircutter, Louise Kaplan describes a relationship between husband and wife, in her book Female Perversions, in which a wife was forced to endure her husband sexualized ritual of clipping a portion of her long golden locks during the act of sexual intercourse. Her punishment to wear a hairstyle that looked like a really bad haircut was the product of her husband’s unconscious fantasies rooted in his primal scene experience with his alcoholic mother and his fantasy involving female degradation. (11)
“The victim of coercive control is isolated from the moorings of her identity and, because identity is first and foremost a social construction, from her own unique personhood.” (1)
“Shaming also involves ritual enactments associated with sex, or basic bodily functions, such as eating, showering, dressing, sleeping, or using the toilet. Clients in my practice have been made to sleep standing up, wear their “bad” clothes for days without changing, eat without utensils, shower repeatedly or in cold water, denied toilet paper, and forced to use the bathroom with the door open, locks removed, or with a timer.” (1)
“Burt (1980) defines rape myths as “prejudicial, stereotyped, or false beliefs about rape, rape victims, and rapists” (p. 217). According to Lonsway and Fizgerald (1994) these beliefs are “widely and persistently held” and generally “serve to deny and justify male aggression against women” (p. 133). Because of the pervasiveness of these beliefs, some scholars and feminists use the term “rape culture” to describe the presence of rape myths in media and public discourse, as well as the general acceptance of these myths in general society (Whisnant 2009).” (10)
There is a believed myth rooted in fear when it comes to female sexuality, a myth that perpetuates a language of silence cross-culturally for women.
“It is obvious in clinical work that women’s silence is deeply influenced by their interactions with their mothers, as well as by the more familiar silencing by men of their wives and daughters that have been identified as manifestations of a heliocentric society……the historian Merry Weisner-Hanks draws a connection between silence and virtue in women: ‘Because Eve tempted Adam by using words, women’s speech becomes linked with sin and disobedience, and female silence is thus interpreted as a divine command.’ She goes on to say that, “Italian, English, and German, Protestant, Jewish and Catholic men all agreed that the ideal woman was……’ chaste, silent and obedient.’” (12)
The ideology that a woman, or any person for that matter, is required to be arbitrarily controlled through remote advanced technology, completely foreclosing on the subject’s voice as a speaking subject, in his or her own right, and the right to her own statements regarding her Truth in the matter. This is a violation of civil rights law which guarantees freedom and liberty in the pursuit of happiness set to one’s own autonomy. I used to wonder quietly to myself, “Why do some men and women fear women’s sexuality to the degree they are willing to kill?” Some unconscious reasons have directly to do with the female’s power to give life and become “the creator god,” or in aspects rooted in the fear of her power as the taker of life in sentencing one to death through literal and metaphorical withholding of the breast and the denying of mother’s vital nourishment and love. This fear is tangled-up in the human psyche’s experience of Oedipus, with the castrating defeat of the little boy by his father during early childhood development. It is also associated with the fear of being replaced in lateral sibling relations by the arrival of a new offspring. (13)(14)(15) But whatever the reason, female procreative power is feared by both men and women alike.
“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.” (16)
Will we ever understand envy and jealousy in terms of female procreative power? Can we understand vehement hatred and psychotic foreclosure in the radical violent silencing of women as speaking subjects? It is only through delving into psychoanalytic literature and research, case studies, feminist writings, and queer writings that help to reveal the origins of this foreclosure and its possible psychotic nature in its foreclosure against the mother, and the father as well; how fetishized behaviors are formed, and aspects of sexual orientation established. (17)
(1) Stark, Evan. (2007) “Coercive Control: The entrapment of women in personal life.” New York. Oxford University Press. pg. 229–288. Chapter 8, The Technology of Coercive Control
(2) Jill Aitoro. “DARPA’s director on how the Pentagon can transition innovation.” IT and Networks. C4ISRNET. http://www.c4isrnet.com (April 17, 2019).
(3) “Six Paths to the Nonsurgical Future of Brain-Machine Interfaces.” (2019) Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. US Department of Defense. www.darpa.mil https://www.darpa.mil/news-events/2019-05-20
(4) Neumann, E. (1984). The spiral of silence: Public opinion — Our social skin. Chicago. University of Chicago Press.
(5) Rousseau, J.J. (1953). The Social Contract. In F. Watkins (Ed. and Trans.) Political writings. London. Nelson.
(6) Tsfati, Yariv and Dvir-Gvirsman, Shira. (2018). Silencing Fellow Citizens: Conceptualization, Measurement, and Validation of a Scale for Measuring the Belief in the Importance of Actively Silencing Others. International Journal of Public Opinion Research, 30(3), 391–419.
(7) Cornell, Drucilla. (1995) “The Imaginary Domain.” New York. Routledge. pp-8–10.
(8) Rawls is quoted in Cornell, “The Imaginary Domain,” p. 9
(9) Dijkstra, Bram. (1986)“Idols of Perversity: Fantasies of feminine evil in the fin-de-seicle culture.” New York. Oxford University Press. (1986). The Mythology of Therapeutic Rape; The Fetish of Death; and Why The Identity of My Perpetrator Must Be Female
(10) Anna E. Kosloski, Bridget K. Diamond-Welch, and Olivia Mann. “The Presence of Rape Myths in the Virtual World: A qualitative textual analysis of the Steubenville sexual assault case.” Violence and Gender. Vol. 5, №3. (October 5, 2018).
(11) Kaplan, Louise J. (1991). Female Perversions: The Temptations of Emma Bovary. New York. Doubleday pgs. 145–154, Chapter 2, Perverse Scenarios, The Case of Mr. R.: The Triumphant Hair Cutter.
(12) Balsam, Rosemary. (2012) “Women’s Bodies In Psychoanalysis.” East Essex Canada. Routledge.
(13) Freud, Sigmund. (1924). The dissolution of the Oedipus Complex. Standard Edition. Volume 19. London: Hogarth Press.
(14) Chasseguet-Smirgel, Janine. (1984) Creativity and Perversion. London. Free Association Books, pgs. 35–43. Chapter 4, A Re-reading of Little Hans.
(15) Mitchell, Juliet. (2000) “Mad Men and Medusas: Reclaiming hysteria.” New York. Basic Books.
(16) Holmes, Lucy. (2013) “Wrestling with Destiny: The promise of psychoanalysis.” New York. Routledge. The chapter on The Medicalization of Childbirth.
The comparison to be made here with this last cited reference should be between electronic stimulation used by the US military and the use of the electromagnetic spectrum in electronic warfare and the use of electronic stimulation in sexual perversion involved in BDSM sex and sexual role-play and observed in acts of bondage and discipline. This connection cannot and should not be ignored as both are rooted in primal scene fantasy (War). Modern advancing technologies current and experimental capabilities against the backdrop of a nation in conflict with itself regarding gender, racial, ethnic, religious, and political differences and how those connections may very well contribute to the phenomenon we now know as the Targeted Individuals (TIs) and electronically Targeted Individual (eTIs).
Other sources worthy to consider but not quoted from:
Anderson, Elijah. (1999). The Code of the Streets: Decency, Violence and the Moral Life of the Inner City. New York: WW Norton.
Ball-Rokeach, Sandra J. (1973). Values and violence: A test of the subculture of violence thesis. American Sociological Review, 38(6), 736−749.
Berburg, Jon Gunnar and T. Thorlindsson. (2005). Violent values, conduct norms and youth aggression: A multilevel study in Iceland. The Sociological Quarterly, 46, 457−478.
Brezina, Timothy. (2004). A quantitative assessment of Elijah Anderson’s subculture of violence thesis and its contributions to youth violence research. Youth, Violence and Juvenile Justice, 2(4), 303−328.
Erlanger, Howard S. (1974). The empirical status of the subculture of violence thesis. Social Problems, 22(2), 280−292.
Felson, Richard, A.E. Liska, S.J. South and T.L. McNulty. (1994). The subculture of violence and delinquency: Individual vs. school context effects. Social Forces, 73(1), 155−173.
Hayes, Timothy C. and Mattew R. Lee. (2005). The Southern culture of honor and violent attitudes. Sociological Spectrum, 25, 593−617.
Nisbett, R.E. and D. Cohen. (1996). Culture of Honor: The Psychology of Violence in the South. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
Ousey, Graham C. and Pamela Wilcox. (2005). Subcultural values and violent delinquency: A multilevel analysis in middle schools. Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice, 3, 3−22.
Sampson, Robert and William Julius Wilson. (1995). Toward a theory of race, Crime and urban inequality. In John Hagan and Ruther Peterson (Eds.), Crime and Inequality (pp. 37−54). Stanford: Stanford University Press.
Smith, Michael. (1979). Hockey violence: A test of the violent subculture hypothesis. Social Problems, 27(2), 235−247.
Stewart, Eric and Ronald Simons. (2006). Structure and culture in African American adolescent violence: A partial test of the “code of the street” Thesis. Justice Quarterly, 23(1), 1−33.
Surratt, Hilary L., James A Inciardi, Steven P. Kurtz and Marion C. Kiley. (2004). Sex work and drug use in a subculture of violence. Crime and Delinquency, 50(1), 43−59.
Washington, Earl M. (1996). A survey of the literature on the theories of violence and its prevention. Journal of Negro Education, 65(4), 403−07.
Wolfgang, Marvin and Franco Ferracuti. (1967). The Subculture of Violence. London: Tavistock.