Wireless Electromagnetic Frequency Assault Torture: A Criminal Profile (abstract)
Updated: December 5, 2024, 8:01 am EST
This question was first posed by Sigmund Freud, the father of psychoanalysis, “What does woman want?” And then re-posed, subsequently, by several other psychoanalysts in following years. It seems to me, as a woman, the male narcissistic desires preclude what a woman wants and becomes obscured through self-interest and greed. Likewise, too, it is only fair to say, that what a man wants can become obscured by the female’s narcissistic desires that seem to be in continuous flux and must be renegotiated in the symbolic space of therapy or dialectic dialogue. But, to address the initial inquiry, “What does a woman want?” I shall give my opinion.
What a woman wants is not to be dominated by an abusive male force that seeks omnipotent control over her mind and body, in an attempt to undermine her identity and sense of autonomy. That is what a woman does not want! What a woman wants is her own self identity, to freely express her own feminine style. A woman wants the confidence that comes with feeling beautiful that means the right to exercise, the right to eat healthy, the right to perform acts that make her feel good about herself in helping others, the right to wear makeup, the right to do her hair as she pleases. And she wants the right to earn her own money through career choices that suit her skills and intellect. A woman wants a right to higher education and learning and a right to opportunities for fair employment. A woman wants the right over her own reproductive freedoms!
The first desire of which I listed, to maintain her own self identity and autonomy, includes that matricide becomes her vital necessity (Kristeva, 1988; Weiland, 1996). The repudiation, rejection, and separation from the maternal breast, that maternal mirror, that same femininity she must identify with, that bore and nursed her into life is fraught with possible maladaptive and difficult outcomes. This makes answering the question, “What does a woman want?” difficult to address in a general way. Because what any woman wants is incumbent upon the enigmatic message she received during the primal scene (Neidecken, 2016).
“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 my caseload to bear tattoos, bites, burns and similar marks of ownership visible to others. Marking signifies that a man has a personal interest in this woman and 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. (Stark, 2007, pg. 260).
In a book, “Creating Bodies: Eating Disorders as Self-Destructive Survival”, Katie Gentile elaborates on the challenges with analyzing a patient’s textual writings. In this case, a young girl’s, with a eating disorder, private diaries.
As Sampson notes, transformative relationships must be embodied. To embody our relationship, I had to enter into the analysis to collaborate with a distinct body, a distinct position of knowing. The anchoring of subjectivity in its body is the condition of coherent identity, and, moreover, the condition under which the subject has a perspective on the world … I did not have this distinct body when I was drowning in her diaries … ( Gentile, 2007, pg. 12).
For me, this is the same position I find myself in with regard to wireless electromagnetic frequency assault torture. Because the perpetrator remains veiled and the assaults invisible, it is difficult to gather any collective physical evidence. Thus, the violence of its tyranny remains silent and unarticulated. That is, the silence of what is not being explicitly stated, must be rooted out and brought to the conscious mind in order for individuals to understand what actually is taking place. For it is only with a distinct body, not an invisible body, one can collaborate with, engage, negotiate and relate! Not invade, merge, penetrate, and abuse, in sadistic fashion, as this technology seeks to do. Only with a distinct body, in verbal dialogue, can one collaborate with, to attempt fluidity of a civil language in which ideas could flow both in and out, back and forth, and in-between two intellectual, mature minded individuals. This position is completely absent in wireless electromagnetic frequency assault torture. For this reason, the space of the third is foreclosed, the space of the third theorized in recognition theory (Benjamin, 2018.). The “Me-You-We” is completely foreclosed and there is only the “I” in the perpetrator’s sole interest to inflict harm, humiliation, pain and suffering in the “Object-Other”. This implies my presence, here on this earth, is disgusting and unpalatable to the person issuing forth the assault torture. I have come to represent, to this perpetrator, the “Object-Other” with the perpetrators articulated, yet silent, abjection. Human relations are dialectic. They are not myopic, but are filled with language in an exchange between two distinct intellectual bodies and minds. Human relations possess linguistic interactions between two people who are willing to, and open for, and intellectual exchange that allows for disagreement and objection in a dialogue of debate of linguistic discourse. Thus, the linguistic interactions of wireless electromagnetic frequency assault torture speaks to me from a position of fantasy, and not reality. The perpetrator wants to speak to me his/her violent wishes but is confronted by the “Annihilation Paradox” of the paranoid-schizoid position (Grand, 2000). So, he/she speaks to me through the creation of an artificial universe, the wireless electromagnetic frequency spectrum; a permutation of a creation based on wish fulfillment of a person’s psychic fantasy of sadistic merger by obliterating the boundaries that separate one person from another. The “distinct body,” trying to collaborate with me, reveals in its silent articulation the world of the “unthought known,” which, in regards to wireless electromagnetic frequency assault torture, is rooted in the anal sadistic universe of BDSM (Bollas, 1987; Chasseguet-Smirgel, 1984).
“… pleasure connected with transgression is sustained by the fantasy that - in breaking down the barriers which separate man from woman, child from adult, mother from son, daughter from father, brother from sister, the erogenic zones from each other, - it has destroyed reality, thereby creating a new one, that of the anal universe were all differents are abolished (Chasseguet-Smirgel, 1985, pg.3).”
Thus, in breaking down the barriers would separate the victim from the perpetrator, the perpetrator is allowed to carry out his/her wireless assaults from a veiled position. Thus, satisfying the annihilation paradox of the victim-cum-perpetrator’s inner psychic constellation. This means, the person carrying out the wireless electromagnetic frequency assault torture against me has undergone a splitting of objects (Madonna/whore, good/evil, pure/contaminated, etc.). The person carrying out these assaults is carrying out a repetition behavior forever locked in his/her past, from the original moment of his her execution. How can the survivor-cum-perpetrator be known by another in a moment defined by its utter loneliness of the execution? Who will be the knower and who and what will be the known? This loneliness is not something wordless that can be ultimately rendered in speech. It is unformulatable: it cannot be represented mutually between two people in a linguistic dialogue of intellectual exchange. Thus, the victim-cum- perpetrator carries out his executions in secret.
Just as feminism began to bolster women’s feelings about their power and potential, and adverse ideology was created by the dominant patriarchy, business leaders, and advertisers to make women feel worthless was urgently needed to justify and perpetuate continued underpayment and devaluation of the female gender. The shift away from curvaceous women to thin, anorexic, pre-pubescently boyish frames was one of the major historical developments of the 20th century. An insidious solution to the dangers of the women’s movement and economic and reproductive freedom of women that began in the late 19th century and early 20th century. Naomi Wolf (2002) saw a malignant political agenda on the cultural fixation of female thinness, not as an obsession with female beauty, but rather as an obsession with female obedience. The epidemic of anorexia and bulimia, which began in the early 1970s, was a direct response to this new ideal of feminine obedience. Wolf believes it is not a culture of thinness that is being peddled to women, but rather distinctive personality traits (passivity, anxiety, and emotionality) through a marketing and advertising culture to control what women believe about themselves. This technology of coercive control cancels out the private sense of a valued self which the women’s liberation movements created for women (Gentile, 2007). We can compare this malignant political agenda to the creation of wireless electromagnetic frequency assault torture or the phenomenon of the Targeted Individual as the coercive means of control to subjugate and manipulate human bodies within a cultural hierarchy. A body that is trained and formed through this malignant technology of wireless electromagnetic frequency assault torture to be fat, otiose, and clumsy is the exact form assumed by a toxic masculinity that wants to tightly control flesh of all kinds via a malignant agenda. Within American culture, fat has come to stand for need, greed, indulgence, wontonness, and an unstoppable loss of control. When economists David Hammermesh and Jeff Biddle concluded in 1993:
“attractive people make more money … good looks increase one’s hourly wage by about 5%, lack of looks decrease it by 7% … (Holmes, 2013, pg. 51)”
We might take this further to mean fat people also earn less money and find it more difficult to find employment because of abjection and negative feelings associated with the image of fat people being slow and dumb. Feelings of abjection and negativity may also be associated with thin people, too, if a person is lacking in the trait of thinness in body image and, therefore, cannot identify with this repudiated form in the “Other.” This information sheds light on why I may have been assaulted every morning during my early morning exercise routine. It appears there is a staunch proclivity for aesthetics and those things beautiful that is strongly hardwired in the human brain and those who do not possess what mainstream culture declares as “valuable”, (beauty, thinness, whiter skin, financial wealth, and higher education, to name a few) can be envious and jealous of others who do possess those very elements. For just as Julia Kristeva (1989) theorized that “matricide becomes our vital necessity” it can seem that cutting and modifying the human body may be the only means of expelling an object felt to be threatening, alien, or polluting, yet at the same time, deeply identified with.
“Childbirth is woman’s talisman, manifest and indisputable evidence of female power (Holmes, 2013).”
How does one metabolize the shame associated with phallic casteration? In female developmental theory, women metabolized castration in layered and constructive ways as the loss of a penis is something negotiated early on in oedipal development. This may be one of the reasons for lower rates of female violence against others in the statistical literature. In female development theory, one of the most natural ways women can acquire their oedipal lost penis is through childbirth and not by some defensive imitation of masculine power, a substitute strategy attempting to acquire phallic domination through artificial imitation which we see in attempts to restore lost youth and beauty through plastic surgery or through other defensive imitations of masculine power. Strategies that include such things as taking on a masculine persona, gender re-assignment, or the phallic dominant violence associated with female serial killers. This is neither a rejection of transgender identifications nor a rejection of plastic surgery. I am simply making a point that will illustrate the nature of wireless electromagnetic frequency assault torture has revealed itself to me to be a defensive imitation of masculine phallic power. Not a real power, but rather its artificial imitation because nothing says a total and utter lack of power like violent rupture in the absence of a dialogue. It is for this reason, although it is unlikely a female perpetrator is carrying out the assaults, if it is a female perpetrator she is most likely between the ages of 20 to 30, has most likely never given birth, may not be in a committed relationship, is possibly unemployed, or if employed she works in related fields of healthcare (Harrison, 2023).
Let’s consider the writing of Michelle Boulous Walker (1998) who states:
“… women are only ambiguously poised in the symbolic. The relation to childbearing does not only act to secure them on this terrain, it also serves, paradoxically, to sever them from it. Kristeva argues that we see this at those special moments when the symbolic breaks down. She writes:
A woman has nothing to laugh about when the symbolic order collapses. She can enjoy it if, identifying with the mother’s vaginated body, she imagines herself thus to be the sublime repressed which returns in the fissures of the order. She can also easily die of it … if, without successful maternal identification the symbolic paternal order were her only tied to life (Kristeva, About Chinese Women, pg. 35).”
Kristeva is suggesting here that women risk a great deal more than men in writing. If they are not successfully identified with the repressed maternal body, then they literally have nothing to cling to in times of symbolic rupture, and this is exactly what poetry entails. Men, however, can play with the repressed maternal body, signifying its negativity, while remaining more securely anchored in the stability of their own paternal symbolic privilege. This is not to say that the male avant-garde risk nothing in writing, certainly not. But rather that what they risk is perhaps literally not of the same order as those women who write (Walker, 1998, pg. 123).”
Thus, the perpetrator issuing forth the wireless electromagnetic frequency assault torture, which acts as an “invisible tether” tying victim-to-perpetrator via a phallic, electrified, invisible penis that penetrates invades and merges with the target victim as something uniquely defined as masculine or, more accurately described as, “masculine imitation”. Thus, in this way, we see a powerless child who, in all likelihood, possesses matricidal destructiveness utilizing advancing technology with the idealization of superior power of the father through an acquired defensive imitation of masculine power (i.e. wireless electromagnetic frequency assault torture). Much how guns and toy slingshots become the play toys for little boys, so too we can analyze wireless electromagnetic frequency assault torture as a masculine creation.
From the standpoint of the victim, the physical assaults of the wireless technology seems to be imbued with an urgency to be known which attends the perpetrator in the final moments before his/her slaughter. Because the nature of the wireless torture speaks an unspoken language reading its silence of the inarticulate is critical. That is to say, that most recently the intensity and frequency of the assault torture I have received has met a fever pitch of urgency gaining in strength towards accumulation that the perpetrator become known to the victim in his or her most powerful presentation to date. And here, there were several events that have transpired over the course of the last six months, I have maintained evidence for, and that evidence humilates the victim. This typology of victim-perpetrator runs parallel to sexual assault and the refusal of the rape victims to come foward to tell her story because it is degrading.
I have previously stated the quality of psychoanalytic relational interaction put forth in the language of wireless electromagnetic frequency assault torture is the language of an anal sadistic universe via a simulation, and imitation of reality (Chasseguet-Smirgel, 1985). In the creation of an alternate reality, where pleasure is contained with transgression and boundary violation, where differences are abolished, and reality destroyed in the creation of a new perverse reality. I turned to Lynn Layton who further argues:
“ Perversity is a lying relation to reality, turning a blind eye to truth. I have argued that at the heart of the perverse relation to reality is an inability to bear self-annihilating feelings that arise from not being able to rely on another for recognition, containment, and care. My definition of social perversion centers on self-estrangement we practice to live in a precarious state that systematically makes dependency shameful, that unlinks the individual and the social in a way that makes it possible to disavow the ways in which we are all interconnected, and therefore encourages the collapse of difference into hierarchies of superior-inferior. Such disavows under lie as well [the American people’s] failure to resist the Iraq War (Harris and Botticelli et. al., 2010, pg. 370)
What I am describing and detailing regarding the nature and character of wireless electromagnetic frequency assault torture reflects a level of control that is particularly insidious because it forces an individual into a role of “sick child” or “dumb child” by inducing pain and suffering, mental anguish, and trauma via an invisible electronic tether. In psychoanalytic terms, the language of wireless electromagnetic frequency assault torture is what Davies and Frawley (1992, 1994) describes as the dynamics between an abuser and an abused child (see Grand, 2000).
Sources
Benjamin, J. (2018) Beyond Doer and Done To: Recognition Theory, Inter-subjectivity and the Third. New York. Routledge.
Bollas, C. (1987) The Shadow of the Object: Psychoanalysis of the Unthought Known. New York. Columbia University Press.
Chasseguet-Smirgel, J. (1985) Creativity and Perversions. London. Free Association Books.
Davies, J.M. & Frawley, M.G. (1992) Dissociative processes and transference counter-transference paradigms in the psychoanalytical oriented treatment of adult survivors of childhood sexual abuse. Psychoanalysis Dialogue, 2:5-36.
Freud, S. (1925) “The Psychical Consequences of the Anatomic Differences Between the Sexes.” In J. Strachey (Ed. & Trans.) The Standard Edition of the Complete Works of Sigmund Freud. London. Hogarth Press. (NOTE: This question arises from Freud’s interaction with women’s resistance to their place in patriarchal society.)
First Do No Harm: The Paradoxical Encounters of Psychoanalysis, Warmaking, and Resistance (2010) Eds., Adrienne Harris and Steven Botticelli. Volume 45, Relational Perspective Book Series. New York. Routledge.
Gentile, K. (2007) Creating Bodies: Eating Disorders as Self-Destructive Survival. London. The Analytic Press.
Grand, S. (2000) The Reproduction of Evil: A clinical and cultural perspective. London. The Analytic Press.
Harrison, M. (2023) Just As Deadly: The psychology of female serial killers. New York. Cambridge University Press.
Holmes, L. (2013) Wrestling with Destiny: The promise of psychoanalysis. New York. Routledge.
Kristeva, J. (1989) Black Sun. New York. Columbia University Press.
__________ About Chinese Women, trans. A. Borrows (London: Marion Boyars, 1977). Originally published as Des Chinoises (Paris: Des femmes, 1974).
Neidecken, D. (2016) “The primal scene and symbol formation.” The International Journal of Psychoanalysis, Vol. 97, No. 3, pp. 665-683.
Stark, E. (2007) Coercive Control: How men entrap women in personal life. New York. Oxford University Press.
Walker, M.B. (1998) Philosophy of the Maternal Body: Reading Silence. New York. Routledge.
Wieland, C. “Matricidal and Destructiveness: Infantile Anxieties and Technological Culture.” British Journal of Psychotherapy. Vol. 12, No. 3 (1996) pp. 300-313.
