A Second Christmas Card Arrest
This is the brief description of Indirect Invocation in All About Women:
Indirect Invocation occurs when the authority of a third party is invoked without referring to the second. Examples are calling the police without asking someone to leave, or complaining about the non-repayment of a loan without confronting the debtor directly. It is a female strategy to avoid confrontation, exploit male protective instincts and raise the cost of involvement with them.
A few days ago I attended York Magistrates Court where I pleaded ‘Not Guilty’ and a trial date was set in March. They reckon the trial will last 2-3 hours. The female prosecutor said my Christmas card was “extremely offensive” which is a considerable advance on “disrespectful.”
Apparently the normal practice in cases like this is for a police officer to visit the accused and warn them that a complaint has been made, and make them sign his notebook to acknowledge that a warning has been received. Then if another complaint is made a charge likely follows. This was not done in my case. As my former co-defendant used to say, it’s “institutional anti-Sheppardism”!
Somehow I’m reminded of the incident near the University of Amsterdam mentioned in TOA, possibly also on this site. The Army had an advertising billboard near the University which, in true Dutch Uber-PC style, featured a female soldier and two males, a black and a white, all smiling in harmonious equality. The students at the University of Amsterdam were so desperate for a masculine target on which to vent their feminist spleen that the Dutch Army advertisment was the nearest thing they could find, and it was defaced.
I was just settling down to a tea-break when there was a knock at the door. I opened it to be confronted with – yet again! – the dome-headed visage of PC Believer, accompanied by a policewoman this time. Shortly they had barged in, telling me I was under arrest for “Causing harassment, alarm or distress” and, PC Believer pointedly added, “Publishing written material to stir up racial hatred.” “What’s that about?” I asked, “I haven’t distributed anything.” “The Christmas card” was the reply. It was 4:30pm.
While I was putting on my boots, not paying very much attention, PC Believer seemed to be saying that he himself had received the complaint from the girl, who had shown him my website and the account of my last arrest featuring him. “It was funny” he said. I was told to follow the WPC, who was shortly to become in my mind ‘WPC Mysterious.’ She led the way out while PC Believer took up the rear. A few seconds later I was in the back of a police van being driven to York, just like before.
It may be noted that both my recent arrests were actually unlawful. Only when a suspect is unwilling to attend voluntarily is an arrest legally justified. I made it clear last time that I would have come willingly, but on both occasions the officers arrived in a van, with no spare seat for a suspect who accompanied them voluntarily. I quote a letter in the Times of 30 April 2013 from a retired Professor of Law:
The Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005 s.24(4) states that an arrest is only lawful if it is necessary. A person who is willing to come to be interviewed at the police station does not need to be arrested.
The PACE Code of Practice on Arrest was amended last October  to make the point crystal clear. New Note 2F says that an arrest would not be necessary where the officer ‘is satisfied as to their identity and address and that they will attend the police station voluntarily to be interviewed, either immediately or by arrangement at a future date and time.’
We arrived at York and hung around a few minutes in the anteroom, there being “sensitive charges” or something going on at the custody desk. I dug in my jacket pocket and my hand emerged with a packet I had found a few days previously, I didn’t know what it was. I put my glasses on to see. “What’s that?” asked WPC Mysterious. “I think it’s a set of earplugs” I said, “Useful.” I then launched into talking about how easy it is to get permanent hearing damage, our ears not being adapted to amplified sound, the structure of the ear and how less is known about how we hear than about how we see. For loud noise, there is a “threshold of pain” at about 120dB at which sound becomes physically painful, but permanent hearing damage can occur – destruction of the hair cells within the cochlea – with either brief, very loud sounds or sustained lesser ones. It is said that sustained exposure to a baby crying at full blast is enough to cause permanent hearing damage. At this WPC Mysterious expressed concern for herself, “I’ve done plenty of that.” She wasn’t very old at all, suggesting that if the baby or babies concerned were hers it would be better for her young family if she were at home with them.
Then I was taken through to the custody desk and the routine began of emptying my pockets, answering questions etc. This time they really didn’t seem to like that I wouldn’t sign to have my fingerprints taken, maybe it makes extra paperwork. I learnt later that I couldn’t even be released until that box was ticked; it was mandatory, even though it was only three weeks since my arrest on 24 December for the same Christmas card. I struck up with WPC Mysterious again, saying that what gets me is that women are taking men’s jobs, doing jobs that men used to do, being paid the same as men, but as soon as something happens they don’t like they act like little 8-year-old girls who would jump out of their skin if you said ‘Boo’ to them. “They,” then pointedly to WPC Mysterious, “– you – can’t have it both ways” I said.
Meanwhile PC Believer, seeing that the situation was in hand and I was discoursing merrily with his much more fetching colleague, kept out of the way and phoned upstairs to receive instructions. PC Believer really is a sterling chap and obviously deserving of promotion, if he can remember to get the arresting offence right. He almost made the same mistake again at the desk but I corrected him. There’s been lots of mistakes like this in the past, and I’ve kept quiet hoping they would provide me with a loophole, but the Public Order Act is infinitely flexible and they just amend the charges.
The formalities out of the way, WPC Mysterious walked me to a cell and held the door open for me to go in. With a straight face I invited her to join me in the cell “to help me pass the time.” I shan’t record her reply here, but it was very feminine.
Minutes passed, then hours. I tried to clear my mind and doze, there being little else to do in a police cell. The shift changed. A personable detention officer came and took my fingerprints. He got an introduction to Procedural Analysis while it was being done: Signals, markers, tokens and handles, and he seemed to pick it up very quickly. As I was walked back to the cell I tried to tell him how crime was the mutation of a handle to a marker, but found myself confused and struggling; I’d forgotten about the ‘implicit handle’ part. I get rusty on my own theory sometimes, being distracted by so many other things, not least events like this. I did tell him that when a neighbour or acquaintance with whom you can expect to exchange a greeting ignores you, that’s the mutation of a handle to a signal.
This time, seeing that things were getting out of hand, I had stipulated immediately that I wanted a lawyer and he arrived. I was pleased that it was the very one that had represented me a few days before at York Magistrates Court. Apparently he had been driving back from a Crown Court case in Leeds when he got the call. I immediately bemoaned the fact that an ‘ordinary criminal’ often commits a hundred crimes and only gets caught for one, while I give Christmas cards to two girls and get dragged off twice.
Two policewomen showed us, my lawyer and I, into the interview room. I went through the card, image by image (it featured ten images, including the two displayed at the top of the Heretical main page over Christmas). Eventually the older policewoman, who led the questioning throughout, came back to the front picture (the Femen activist) and wanted to know what the significance of it was. “It’s just a good image” I said.
Then mention was made of my “previous” for “causing harassment” and I told her about the time I had been handing out leaflets of the Signals List (‘Mainly Female, Mainly Sexual Signals’) to men in the city centre of Hull. A policewoman had been passing by and asked if she could have one. “Yes of course” I had replied. Sometime later I was charged, she claiming it had “caused her distress.” That, I said, could be the very offence she had pointed to on my “rap sheet.”
A few women have taken exception to this list, instinctively or consciously sensing that it is contrary to their interest. In fact it’s a reflection of neurosis. This was confirmed by F21DSG during a squatters’ meeting in Amsterdam: “You make me neurotic about whether I’m signalling or not.”
The point, I went on to say, was that some weeks later I was idly looking through a Sunday magazine and saw a feature about a female psychologist who had reached the same conclusions, although her list of signals was considerably less extensive than mine. Yet I had been criminally prosecuted for my list while she had been the subject of a flattering magazine feature.
During the interview I told the two policewomen that “feminism won’t make you any happier” and if they are reading this, it’s not just me who says so. Here’s a reference as it appears in Sex & Power:
The changes brought about through the women’s movement may have decreased women’s happiness. The increased opportunity to succeed in many dimensions may have led to an increased likelihood of believing that one’s life is not measuring up. Similarly, women may now compare their lives to a broader group, including men, and find their lives more likely to come up short in this assessment. Or women may simply find the complexity and increased pressure in their modern lives to have come at the cost of happiness. ‘The Paradox of Declining Female Happiness,’ American Economic Journal: Economic Policy, 2009
I said that historically the girl complainant would have gone to a “male protector” (by which I meant, a male she had “honoured” with that role) “but now she comes to you, and finds lots of sympathetic policewomen to write her statement.” Reference was made to the accusations of sexual impropriety that are the rage in England at the moment. Recently three trials involving actors and entertainers started on the same day. Particularly, that one of the allegations is about something that was supposed to have happened 49 years ago.
There was no doubt this time that the complaint had followed looking me up on the internet, and the Wikipedia page about me was mentioned, so I suppose Wikipedia’s Jewish moderators can chalk up another success. Some of the girl’s statement was quoted, I gave the analogy of the little 8-year-old girl again, and said that the place where I’d been exchanging a few words with her doesn’t have a sign outside saying ‘Only bland people allowed in here.’
Indiscriminate marking is a masculine instinct and something I do, much of the time anyway. Talking to people with no particular reason is indiscriminate marking, as is a company giving away free samples or gifts. They may be seeking to acquire “goodwill,” but that’s a token (until the business is sold, at which point the company’s “goodwill” is given a tangible value). I told them my observations in Holland, about what seems to happen around Queen’s Day. This is a national holiday when everyone fills the streets and there are stalls and entertainments everywhere. Officially, no tax is due that day.
For the four or five days leading up to Queen’s Day, and of course during it, it’s as if a catharsis takes place for the entire year of the instinct to indiscriminately mark. There are comparable effects during Christmas-time in Britain.
The question arose as to how many cards I’d put out. Only two to people I didn’t know very well, I said, then recalled that I had given one to my barber, and said so. It occurred to me that this might have been a mistake, as I wouldn’t put it past them to send some nosy PCSO around the local barbershops to solicit another complaint. For the Don’t Be Sheeple (the free newspaper I distributed in 2008 or thereabouts) I learnt that it had been a complaint from a single Jewess that had led to my third police raid, during which thousands of pounds-worth of equipment was taken (and never returned). Then the police had gone door-to-door encouraging people to make statements. There was a bunch of them at the trial, so they even managed to get a conviction on that.
As we emerged from the interview room the senior policewoman held open the door. “After you” she said. I commented that it was a role-reversal. “Nature is the supreme force you know, you can only go against it for so long.” Then perhaps another hour and a half was spent in the cell, with me wondering if I would be staying the night. Eventually the door opened and it was the elder policewoman again. I commented on Nature always being She, always feminine, as we walked back to the custody desk. There I was bailed; the male officer behind the desk was being quite jocular and made a joke about skywriting, which he had to explain (he was thinking old-fashioned planes, I was thinking lasers). I said it wasn’t a bad joke, for a policeman. I wasn’t charged this time.
|Women KKK members march in early America. The Ku Klux Klan was a Christian organisation which administered ‘frontier justice’ in the days before mobile phones and the internet. They lynched criminal whites as well as blacks.|
It was now 11pm and I talked “off the record” to the senior policewoman out in the foyer while restoring my property to my pockets and sorting out a taxi home. It was actually a minibus and I joined the driver at the front. Then he listened to me telling him three stories at once; I was “hyper” from my experiences. We discussed Gresham’s Law, wine and the wartime tin of sardines. Plus how writers make ‘the death of a thousand cuts,’ Mencken being the Master (see ‘The Wedding’). Shortly we arrived within walking distance of my flat, and I gave him every penny I had, which was still a few pounds short of the horrendous amount showing on the meter. He could have driven me to a bank machine if he’d insisted.
Later I got to thinking about the women coming forward with sordid claims from decades ago briefly mentioned during the interview. These certainly have the stamp of Debasement, but I haven’t quite worked it through yet. Here I shall explore and see if it comes out.
An element of Procedural Analysis is that procedures advance. Players seek to proceed. Behaviour can evolve in a micro-evolutionary fashion, to confer further benefit. The forces are ancient, but the way those forces become manifest can dynamically alter. An existing advantageous procedure can be modified and extended for greater advantage or new ones. Unlike normal evolutionary time-scales, these changes are practically visible before our eyes. The progression of Disclosure to Debasement is as good an example as any.
Disclosure takes place when a female, shortly after sex, reveals intimate details of her past. Putatively (for I stress again, this is a theoretical system) this is evolutionarily advantageous, in that it reinforces a pair-bond. This leads to a stable environment for progeny should she fall pregnant from this occasion or a subsequent one. The male’s caretaking instincts may be inspired.
However, the Disclosure can be advanced to take place not post-coitus, but pre. In this scenario the revelations are used as a test of the male. Then the revelations function to check the male’s resolve before there is even a possibility of falling pregnant to him. Specifically, she tests whether the male is to stay around to care for her during the lengthy gestation and still lengthlier rearing of progeny. In this scenario the revelations may be exaggerated for greater effect, increasing the efficacy of the procedure.
Historically and evolutionarily, pregnancy for the female involves high cost. Not only in terms of the biological resources she provides to the foetus, but also risk of death. Death during childbirth was a major cause of female mortality until quite recently. Thus for the female, “notional” sex is much safer – indulging in fantasies about sex is a great deal less risky than actually doing it. She can use a male’s preparedness to enter into sex with her to fuel those fantasies, and a female assuring herself of a male’s willingness to engage with her is a rich origin of many psychological games.
A key component of Debasement is that, as the sex becomes more notional, so too does the Debasement. That is, the less physical sex she has, the wilder will be the Debasement (potentially a testable hypothesis). It is notable that it is not only the female making the revelations that is debased: the male is diminished too, by his association with her. This, indeed, is part of the “test.” If he fails this trial the relationship will be abandoned pre-coitus, and she can then safely continue her quest for a male who is more likely to stay with her during the months and years ahead when she needs him.
Now, generalising, we apply the Debasement model to evangelical Christians. (This is an impartial analysis of behaviour; I mean to disrespect whatever to them.) The same dynamic operates, indeed as best as I can tell it is the same mechanism, with the same pattern of forces. (By which I mean, similar forces act in comparable ways.) Among evangelical churches there is almost a “celebrity circuit” of individuals who “bear witness” to their lives before they were “born again.” The greater the wickedness of the individual before his conversion, the more impressive he is, and the more eagerly he is heard. This is the vector which encourages exaggeration, for it is obvious that this sometimes takes place, of his former sinful life. His audience is also debased, for they too are human, and conscious of sin.
When someone “bears witness” in this way God is glorified (enhanced), that He is able to rescue such a sinful person. Does the model fall down at this point? Here though God is notional: this is a closed system, involving analysis as a game, based on evolutionary precepts. Comparably when a female engages in dramatic, public Debasement she is enhanced, by being given attention and assuming importance. So enhancement takes place in both scenarios.
Debasement then is a potential model for the accusations of sexual impropriety by media figures decades previously now filling pages in the British tabloid newspapers. It can confidently be predicted that some of these allegations will be found to be fiction. Putting the analysis aside for a moment, it strikes me that these trials will often amount to nothing more than a competition to convince (the jury). On one side is a professional actor, on the other, a female who probably believes her own fantasies.
It is clear that these instances of Debasement (if such they are; I think so) benefit females generally, by raising the cost of sex and increasing male neurosis. Hence this is one of many female procedures which are not only of benefit to her individually, but to females collectively (Compound Benefit).
Debasement is also a superior model for “false memory syndrome,” superior because it is part of a consistent system, with a putative evolutionary origin. According to the well-established rules of science Procedural Analysis, being internally consistent, must be taken seriously.
Perhaps I have an unusual metabolism or something, because it wasn’t until around the second mug of tea that I started shaking, a delayed reaction to the traumatic events of the day. It was as if I had Parkinson’s. Then I switched to brandy, and got thoroughly blotto’d. Normality returned as I found myself pondering what to do about the problems with Amazon and the 4.3V Zener diode needed for the spare ‘scope under the bench.
A friend comments: “You could validate your Christmas card experiment, by distributing them to very much larger numbers of girls and it would be interesting to see if the socio-economic group makes any difference to the number of complaints. Your results could then be peer-reviewed, but on second thoughts perhaps not, as you would probably be charged with incitement to mass hysteria.”