#Aletheia Capital

[lefkosahaberleri]

DeepSeek, Yapay Zeka Asistanıyla Zirveye Yerleşti

New Post has been published on https://lefkosa.com.tr/deepseek-yapay-zeka-asistaniyla-zirveye-yerlesti-37400/

DeepSeek, Yapay Zeka Asistanıyla Zirveye Yerleşti

DeepSeek, yapay zeka asistanıyla iş süreçlerini dönüştürerek verimliliği artırdı ve sektördeki liderliğini pekiştirdi. Yenilikçi çözümleriyle zirveye yerleşen DeepSeek, geleceğin teknolojisini bugünden sunuyor.

https://lefkosa.com.tr/deepseek-yapay-zeka-asistaniyla-zirveye-yerlesti-37400/ --------

[channeledhistory]

Das chinesische Startup für Künstliche Intelligenz, DeepSeek, hat zu Wochenbeginn globale Technologieaktien erschüttert - und Fragen über Amerikas technologische Dominanz aufgeworfen. Größter Leidtragender war die Aktie des US-Chipkonzerns Nvidia. Die Papiere des Nasdaq-Konzerns brachen um 17 Prozent auf 118,42 Dollar ein.

Damit wurden auf einen Schlag 589 Milliarden Dollar Börsenwert ausradiert; es war der höchste Tagesverlust in der Geschichte der Wall Street. [...]

[...]

Hintergrund der massiven Kapitalverschiebungen ist das neueste KI-Modell des chinesischen Konzerns DeepSeek. [...]

Experten verweisen derweil mit Begeisterung darauf, dass das DeepSeek-Modell extrem kosteneffektiv sei, läuft es doch auf weniger Chips mit deutlich geringerer Leistung.

Das ließ am Markt Zweifel an den himmelhohen Bewertungen für Unternehmen wie Nvidia aufkommen. Bislang wurden die Nvidia-Chips als wesentlich für die Entwicklung von Künstlicher Intelligenz angesehen. Der US-Konzern hatte nahezu ein Monopol darauf und führte entsprechend den weltweiten KI-Aktienboom an.

[...]

Doch Nvidia ist nicht der einzige westliche Technologie-Konzern, der nun um seine künftigen Gewinne bangen muss: Das DeepSeek-Produkt "ist zutiefst problematisch für die These, dass die erheblichen Investitions- und Betriebsausgaben, die das Silicon Valley getätigt hat, der geeignetste Weg sind, dem KI-Trend entgegenzutreten", sagte Nirgunan Tiruchelvam von Aletheia Capital [...] "Es stellt die enormen Ressourcen in Frage, die für KI aufgewendet wurden."

Auch der renommierte US-Ökonom Ed Yardeni ist überzeugt: "Das könnten schlechte Nachrichten für die 'Magnificent Seven' sein, die mit ihren teuren Diensten den KI-Markt dominieren wollten." Zu den "Glorreichen Sieben" gehören Apple, Microsoft, Nvidia, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta und Tesla [...]

[...]

[thewolfisawake]

Locations of the Unseelie

...because I'm starting to lose track of names and it is a pain.

The Citadel - The capital of the Unseelie, the epicenter of the 'cave system,' and the largest trading hub of the realm. It has the most advancement and cultural preservation of all the settlements. The ruler resides here.

Dun an Fhómhair - The Fortress of Autumn. This is the name of the castle that the ruler resides in. It is the most fortified building of the entire Unseelie. It floats in the center of the Citadel and is right above the Abyss.

The Abyss - The most common name of a huge pit in the middle of the Citadel. The history as to why the Unseelie built around the Abyss has been lost. It is immensely deep that some call it bottomless. It is considered the worst imprisonment with no chance of survival. There are magic safeguards for lower levels of the pit to help retain that reputation. This is Balmoral's actual birthplace.

Gile Silear - Essentially the national bank and vault of currency within the Unseelie. Founded and built up by the Ròsach family and currently headed by Daileas.

Welkin Repository - The place where the skies for the Citadel are transcribed and stored. It is the second largest place for gathering within the Citadel, second only to Dun an Fhómhair. It can be considered a large gallery as the past skies are available around the Repository for viewing.

Lùchairt Ghlòrmhor - Literally the Glittering Palace. Also called the Winter Palace. The centerpiece of the Sluagh na Marbh and where the 'true' throne of the Unseelie resides. The ruler resides here during the early winter to early spring in order to assist in collection of the dead. This is where the Unseelie have most of their party season. This does technically extend to a settlement outside of the actual castle. And in emergency theoretically can house the entirety of the Unseelie.

The Workshop - The residence and literal workshop of the Maven, a smith in almost any crafting discipline. The workshop is reclusive, being outside of the Citadel but not so far that the Maven couldn't take a jaunt over there. There is a collection of items that they have crafted over the years and do not mind being used, granted one is gracious to them. There is a teleport spell circle to the Workshop used by the generals and the king as well as their other affiliation, Aletheia.

The Wastes - A section of the Unseelie realm containing several settlements. It was named such because of a combination of hostile environments and the neglect and poverty that had been allowed to run rampant within it. This includes areas like Glasranvar and Mag na Scathanna.

Glasranvar - A formerly poor settlement within the Wastes. At current, it is more akin to a small Macau or Vegas. This is because it is the location of the start and end of the Corpsevain Run, a race that is known for its unpredictability and betting pools on them are large. It is one of the places in Unseelie where 'outlanders' are allowed to 'own' parts of the area. It is heavily saturated with mana due to the manipulation of the land to create new tracks.

Mag na Scathanna - Literally the Plain of Shadows. This is considered one of the furthest corners of the Unseelie and the poorest. It is believed to be linked to part of an Otherworld and where many seer fae had ended up. Despite the poverty, it did possess a great deal of oral history. It is now considered a 'ghost town' due to the massacre of the fae residing there for false allegations of treason. This is Faolan's birthplace and due to the location of Mag na Scathanna is where she gained the name 'The Wolf of the Wastes.'

Coille de Fir-fhuadain - The Forest of Wanderers/Exiles. A 'corridor' within the Unseelie that has trees that cycle through the seasons within a day. During the 'nightfall' of the area, the forest becomes dangerous to explore without warding or remaining within the villages as the forest eats one's memories, causing them to become 'lost.'

Tír Leochaileach - Literally the Fragile Land. A region that is looks like under the sea and caverns that were carved out of glass. A waterfall and rivers of molten silica also run through here. It is tied with a legend of fae lovers that may have met their end in the region.

Muir Uaigh - Literally the Sepulchre Sea. Also called the Buried Sea. The waters flow underneath all of Unseelie, except seemingly the Abyss. The Buried Sea usually refers to the beaches of Unseelie that has been made safe for fae. Sepulchre Sea refers to the rest of the waters that are infested with mermaids that may or may not be the souls of drowned Unseelie that prey on the longing on the victims to lure them into the waters to kill them.

Crois-Rathaid Airgid - Literally the Silver Crossroads. Also called the Breadbasket of the Kingdom. The only settlement of the Unseelie located on the mortal plane. It is where a good deal of food is produced for the Unseelie. In exchange for protection and essentially good health/fortune, the residents--mainly humans--willfully provide for the fae.

[absentia-if]

I'm so fascinate dby the way u come up with ideas based on words. Idk if you're still doing these but if you saw the title Kalopsia what would think the story would be about? This is just for fun lol, so no pressure. ❤️

Hmm…

Kalopsia: The city of Dolos was known as a Utopia to most. Poverty was almost nonexistent within the cities protective walls. There were few crimes and the ones that did occur were quickly taken care of. Life was seemingly perfect for all those fortunate enough to be borne within the capital of Kallos; the most ancient province within the Empire of Aletheia. There’s few things you ever had to wish for, being part of the Royal Family, but you’ve always wondered what life was like outside the walls of the city. Wonder what lays beyond the wall of marble and iron. You just never expected that you’d one day be forced to find out. Forced to see that life within Dolos wasn’t exactly as you believed it to be. Will you be able to find your footing in a world so unlike what you’ve heard about? Will you be able to save the rest of the people, your people, living within Dolos?

Main Genre: Dystopian/Medieval (sort of) Fantasy.

[martial-law-architecture]

Cultural Center of the Philippines: A Recap on its Roots

By: Adrienne Ocampo

It is undeniably true that Marcos was highly influential in the establishment of public infrastructure, and with numerous roads, the CCP Complex is one of the structures built during his era that are continuously in use today.  On the other hand, Marcos' triumphs in public infrastructure came at a price. Many of Marcos' programs and projects were financially supported by external debt, having left the country with an estimated $28.3 billion in debt by 1986. These projects have also been widely popular for their high overspending, extravagance, and corruption. 

The Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP) complex was designed and constructed on land taken from naval battles as a component of the Marcos administration's insistence on cultivating Filipino civilization and "the Filipino soul." It was completely designed by architect Leandro Locsin. It served as the venue for many artists' masterpieces.

The Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP), also referred to as the Sentrong Pangkultura ng Pilipinas, is found in Pasay, Metro Manila, on the reclaimed ground along Roxas Boulevard. the whole facility spans 88 hectares of land. It provides performance and exhibition spaces for both international and domestic performances. the power also accommodated a variety of union cultural events. The venues varied first from Miss Universe Pageant in 1974, which prompted the creation of the people Arts Theater, to the 1982 Manila International festival, which prompted the contentious Manila Film Center to be built. The Coconut Palace, also called Tahanang Pilipino, is similar because the Philippine International Convention Center is a part of the property.

As per the observations, the Cultural Center of the Philippines (CCP) structure had outstanding scenery and a green grass landscape, and most visitors appreciated the natural character of the placement. They likewise adored the mesmerizing glimpse that their eyes observed. Plus, the general public within the area is bicycling, others are playing, some are jogging, and a few are practicing something. People are just sitting nearby, taking in the breathtaking scenery. The stunning fountain is the highlight of the realm. It was absolutely enormous and spectacular, and other people appreciated its unique design and shape, which resembled a loop. The water within the fountain wasn't clear enough to determine reflections; it had a dark brown tone, and lots of fish swimming in it, some species of fish, which was enjoyable to determine. However, this grand infrastructure ultimately drained the government's finances because it was absolutely built with borrowed funds. Marcos got the complex's development with funds from the Cultural Development Fund, funds raised by Imelda, and loans from the globe Bank and therefore, international money. By 1972, the CCP has burdened with a debt of PhP 63 million from the theater's construction alone. Not soon after declaring the law, late former president Ferdinand Marcos enacted a bailout of the CCP, with the government usurping the center's financial liabilities. Was it worth it? It's hard to see its value when the towering debt is too much to ignore.

Sources:

Manapat, R. (1991). Some are smarter than others: A history of Marcos’ crony capitalism. Aletheia Publications.

Edifice Complex: Building on the Backs of the Filipino People. Martial Law Museum. Retrieved September 21, 2022, from https://martiallawmuseum.ph/magaral/edifice-complex-building-on-the-backs-of-the-filipino-people/

[viviae]

Day 1 - Hometowns

@arcana-echoes​ 

Celica Nightingale

Celica was technically born on the roads leading from Hesperia to Vesuvia so her exact location of birth is a big question mark. However she was raised in Vesuvia where her parents owned the magic shop originally. Once her parents were killed her aunt Cerys soon took care of raising her and the magic shop where they struggled to make ends meet due to Cerys being nowhere as talented as Celica’s mother Araceli. Growing up skirting the line of poverty made Celica resent Vesuvia but she didn’t know about any other places and Cerys was pretty strict about her leaving in fear of her still being a target.

Eventually when Sidereus comes to train her and hopefully have her become the heiress of their family she starts to get overwhelmed by the idea of going to Hesperia since it’s so alien from Vesuvia. Paired with Nefeli also starting to pay for all their living expenses, when she is forced to remain in Vesuvia she gets a fonder appreciation for the city.

Sidereus Nightingale

Sidereus was raised within the capital city of Hesperia, Aletheia. A grand port city of towering manors and the tombs for the dead plagued under a darkened sky that remains in a permanent state of being a dust bowl. Hesperia was plunged into darkness due to pride of overeager magicians and because of this it’s quite inhospitable, but the people have adapted to survive.

Sidereus felt a call to travel when he was young and due to such he doesn’t have a strong connection to his home. Even as a kid he begged to leave the city any chance he could and for his aunt Araceli to take him with him. Eventually when he became a Master of Curses he was able to fulfill his need for travel and he very rarely returns to Hesperia unless for work or family reasons.

Nefeli Nightingale

Like Sidereus Nefeli was born and raised within the capital city of Hesperia, Aletheia. Nefeli was much more active in the city however as a renowned poet and playwright she was a local celebrity. As well as being in a relationship with two Princes of Hesperia Asmadeus & Venari* she was well known within the city. However she frequently felt like a bird in a gilded cage as she constantly under her mother’s scrutinizing eye and so it made her fame come with a price of constantly being criticized. She was also only allowed to leave the city under the company of her partners and their necessary servants and personal guards which was compressing and stifling. 

*Hesperian Princes are NOT related. It’s an elected position that is open to any high born individual no matter gender that is merely called a Prince out of tradition.

[buendischerwaldgang]

People unironically believe that the current reduction of pollution due to corona can only be attributed to a disturbance of capitalism and hence, because of their inability to think outside of the materialist dichotomy (communism and capitalism), cry for a communist solution. Both of these materialist systems are heirs of a desacralizing, nature-challenging and nature-destroying spirit, what Heidegger called Herausfordern (to challenge [nature]). Herausfordern is a modus operandi of Entbergen (discovering), which is the act of ‘finding what is beyond/true (aletheia)’ with techne (technology and the rational reasoning behind). Herausfordern doesn’t just ask to discover, however, it also asks that the discovered becomes Bestand (stock), which has to be always available. This whole act is what Heidegger calls Gestell (enframing). Heidegger concludes that this Stellen (the act of making a Gestell) removes a human’s ability to find truth. It leads him to Seinsvergessenheit (forgetfulness of Being), as the requirements of the ability to find truth are forgotten by relying on the Gestell and as challenging nature (Herausfordern) is believed to be the only way of finding truth, not art or beauty. This is in fact the system that materialism and progressivism has created, the world is nothing but a Gestell.  This is where Heidegger famously quotes Hölderlin: ‘where there is danger, there is also the one who saves’, saying that in danger of forgetting being, catastrophes caused by the system itself can lead to turning away from it (Abkehr/Kehre). This is exactly what is happening in some minds right now: The disturbance of the system/experience with death leads people to their own being, history and community, makes them conscious about it. The cry for ‘another system’ (which is, as shown, the same system (one that challenges)) is nothing but weakness, it is the inability to accept being. 

[spartan-officer-brasidas]

Things I hope to see in the third chapter of the Atlantis dlc:

more deities. I’m thinking behind Poseidon, gods like Aphrodite, Apollo, Artemis, etc. Atlantis is often cited as a city of gods, so this would be a great place for more gods

the amazons (I’m going to make a post detailing this more)

lots of technological advancements. Once again, this is Atlantis—a known advanced civilization

more mythology based quests and references

I would love for this Atlantis to be relatively true to Plato’s Atlantis!!!

Now I’m going to go into story specific stuff that may contain spoilers from the leaks and stuff, so be warned

I really would love to see the Hekatonchires in a set of three, each with 100 hands (as in their myth) but I doubt this will happen

I’m hoping they’ll really capitalize on Altas and Poseidon’s connection to the city

Maybe we’ll see Zeus because he’s the one who decided the fate of Atlantis in Plato’s Critias even though it wasn’t elaborated after. I know I want to see Zeus’ involvement in this

It’d be pretty cool if they tie Hephaistos in via the volcanic eruption on Thera! Though idk how they’d handle it actually happening unless they portray it as slowly erupting and never fully reaching decimation for the sake of the dlc

What if we get to try to either save Atlantis from itself or put an end to it all together with the help of Hephaistos/whoever

I honestly just want good Atlas content. There’s a lot of potential here lol

In terms of modern day, I’d love to see Juno here and NOT in Atlantis really. I think with Aletheia, it would be much easier to include her in the modern day

It’d be nice to see Juno and Aletheia butt heads with Layla maybe having to make a choice with regards to the state of Atlantis

Or maybe Aletheia betrays Layla for her mother? The options are endless tbh

I still want more deities. I could go on about the implications Atlantis has that gods would’ve been common there

I might add to this later, but this is a good start. I’m extremely excited and have high hopes for this episode!!!

[cthonicascendant]

Zeke: i guess what i'm trying to say is i don't get why people use typing quirks. how does that make it EASIER to talk? Aletheia: I'm gonna tell him. Crow: omg do it, it'll be hilarious. Zeke: ...tell me what. Aletheia: You have a typing quirk. Zeke: I do not! Aletheia: Hm, let's see. Types in all lowercase except for Designated Emphasis Capitalizations. Swaps words for their phonetic alphanumeric equivalents. Otherwise abbreviates words as much as possible. Crow: sounds like a quirk to me! Zeke: **unintelligible sputtering**

[digitalfime]

Don’t count on the West, EMs have to self help: Jim Walker

Don’t count on the West, EMs have to self help: Jim Walker

By Nikunj Dalmia Given India’s demographics and its potential, if a government really gets its act together in that way, then 8-10% growth for a decade is easy, says Jim Walker , Chief Economist, Aletheia Capital Ltd . You are a big believer in cycles. The 1970s and early 80s belonged to Japan, followed by the US, then China. The last 10 years in a sense have been dominated by a huge expansion in…

[channeledhistory]

Der Hype um die neue chinesische KI Deepseek erreichte am Wochenende einen Höhepunkt – und sorgte unter Anlegern für grosse Unruhe. Sie fürchten, dass amerikanische Tech-Konzerne wie Nvidia oder Open AI mit Chat-GPT ihre dominante Stellung bei der künstlichen Intelligenz verlieren könnten.

Die an der amerikanischen Technologie-Börse Nasdaq zusammengefassten Aktien standen am Montag stark unter Druck, Futures auf den Index gaben deutlich nach. Auch die europäischen Börsen und der Bitcoin gaben nach. Die Aktienkurse wichtiger Tech-Zulieferer in Europa wie ASML oder Siemens Energy verloren im zweistelligen Prozentbereich.

Das KI-Modell R1 von Deepseek kann über eine App abgerufen werden und kann leistungsmässig mit etablierten KI-Sprachmodellen wie Chat-GPT oder Claude mithalten. Der einflussreiche amerikanische Tech-Investor Marc Andreessen nannte Deepseek auf X «einen der erstaunlichsten und beeindruckendsten Durchbrüche, die ich je gesehen habe». Die Tatsache, dass Deepseek auf dem Open-Source-Prinzip basiere, also allen zugänglich ist, sei ein «Geschenk für die Welt».

[...]

Das Bahnbrechende an Deepseek ist, dass eine leistungsfähige KI viel effizienter und kostengünstiger betrieben werden kann als bei herkömmlichen Modellen. Chat-GPT oder Gemini beanspruchen enorme Rechenleistungen und Hochleistungs-Chips. Bei diesen verfügt der amerikanische Chip-Konzern Nvidia derzeit über ein Quasi-Monopol. Wegen Sanktionen werden die leistungsfähigsten KI-Chips aber nicht nach China geliefert.

Gemäss Tech-Experten könnte Deepseek die gesamte KI-Lieferkette auf den Kopf stellen. Diese wird von den amerikanischen Chip-Anbietern und grossen Betreibern von Rechenzentren (Hyperscaler) wie Alphabet, Amazon oder Microsoft dominiert. Sie investieren enorme Summen in den Ausbau ihrer KI-Infrastrukturen. Gemäss Schätzung der UBS wollen die amerikanischen Tech-Konzerne dieses Jahr weitere 280 Milliarden Dollar in KI investieren.

Im Gefolge des KI-Booms sind amerikanische Tech-Aktien stark gestiegen und haben hohe Bewertungen erreicht. Insbesondere Nvidia hat profitiert: Die Aktien des Chip-Entwicklers haben sich seit der Lancierung von Chat-GPT im November 2022 im Wert verachtfacht. Aber auch die Aktien von Alphabet, Meta oder Microsoft haben sehr hohe Bewertungsniveaus erreicht.

Ihre Dominanz wurde durch den KI-Boom verstärkt – mittlerweile sind die amerikanischen Indizes stark konzentriert und von den Bewegungen dieser Werte abhängig. Das macht die Aktien dieser Tech-Konzerne anfällig für Kursrückschläge. Werden wegen Deepseek nun ihre KI-Strategien grundsätzlich angezweifelt, könnte das an der Börse einen Stimmungswechsel gegenüber amerikanischen Tech-Werten zur Folge haben.

«Die enormen Ressourcen, die für KI aufgewendet wurden, werden infrage gestellt», sagt der Tech-Experte Nirgunan Tiruchelvam von Aletheia Capital gegenüber Bloomberg. Die Strategie der amerikanischen Tech-Giganten war bisher, ihre KI-Kapazitäten maximal auszubauen, koste es, was es wolle. Damit begründeten die Konzerne ihre enormen Investitionen in KI-Chips und Rechenzentren.

Deepseek zeigt nun einen Weg auf, wie leistungsfähige KI viel effizienter betrieben werden kann. So ist Deepseek selbst kein grosser Tech-Konzern, sondern ein kleiner, in Peking ansässiger Spin-off eines Hedge Funds namens High Flyer. Er wird vom Unternehmer Liang Wenfeng geleitet. Laut Medienberichten kommt Deepseek mit 200 Mitarbeitenden aus. Die Entwicklungskosten des KI-Modells R1 sollen nur 6 Millionen Dollar betragen haben.

Der Durchbruch von Deepseek könnte auch die jüngst lancierte amerikanische KI-Initiative Stargate herausfordern. [...]

[...] Die Aktien des japanischen Tech-Konglomerats Softbank haben am Montag in Tokio zeitweise mehr als acht Prozent verloren.

Der Durchbruch von Deepseek kommt aber auch für die amerikanischen Tech-Riesen zu einem ungünstigen Zeitpunkt. Diese Woche werden Apple, Microsoft, Meta und Tesla Finanzzahlen vorlegen und sich der Frage stellen müssen, wie sie auf Deepseek reagieren wollen.

[manuelmccarthy]

(notas y reflexiones)

PROGRESO-INTELIGENCIA ARTIFICIAL-POSITIVISMO-TECNOUTOPÍA-¿ALETHEIA ALGORÍTMICA? (Quizás en vez de aletheia algorítmica sería aletheia de los discuros pro-avance tecnológico) TECNOFILIA

 Consumimos y adoramos a las nuevas tecnologías como si de un neo-dios se tratasen.

¿Qué hay detrás de los discursos positivistas sobre inteligencia artificial? ¿Qué corporación enuncia(rá) la nueva verdad?

Venden la idea de la tecnoutopía a través del avance de las nuevas tecnologías, algoritmos, inteligencias artificiales…

El peligro de la historia única, Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie

Estos discursos no hacen sino alimentar la gran rueda del capitalismo de datos, capitalismo de La Verdad.

¿QUIÉNES SE QUEDAN ATRÁS EN EL LLAMADO “PROGRESO TECNOLÓGICO?

 Discursos centrados en el utopismo del fin del trabajo, un mundo sin trabajo… Vas a poder centrarte en cosas más placenteras, deja atrás la fábrica y los procesos alienantes.

¿el sistema capitalista va a permitirlo? Con el fin de unos trabajos precarios, van a surgir otros también precarios (¿aún más precarios?) (documental trabajadores fantasma, metrópolis rtve)

¿Quién trabaja PARA las máquinas, quién POSEE las máquinas? Los trabajos capacitados (aquellos en los que se necesita una formación específica, especializada…) van a desaparecer, sustituidos por IAs que te superan infinitamente en capacidades y velocidad (la compraventa de acciones realizada por programas, echando a los humanos porque son lentos) (inversiones millonarias para ganar cantidades ínfimas de tiempo para conseguir ser más rápidos)-(desdoblamiento y extensión del tiempo, hay fenómenos que ya no podemos percibir- si no los podemos percibir, ¿son reales?-la percepción de lo real).

Te sustituyen en el trabajo (y te quejas) pero utilizas el asistente virtual de Ikea sin preocuparte (que ha sustituido a la atención al cliente formada por humanos). Todas las (neo)tecnologías que utilizas han perjudicado/precarizado/suplantado el trabajo a otros humanos. El “progreso” viene dado por el daño/perjuicio de personas. No solo las más vulnerables (aquellas sin formación, en trabajos repetitivos, fácilmente sustituibles [antiguo proletariado]) ahora también los que en principio parecían más intocables, a los que se accede con una cualificación, preparación, estudios, superiores (controladores aéreos, brokers, incluso médicos de consulta [lo que Guy Standing denomina precariado, puede])

¿Quién está a salvo de esta tendencia? – Quien posee las máquinas (aunque no trabaje de nada, las máquinas producen un capital que acumula su dueño). ¿Quién enuncia los discursos positivistas? – Quienes poseen/desarrollan/te-sustituyen-por dichas tecnologías, o quienes son pagados para hacerlo (Yann Lecun…) (Silicon Valley, Nick Bostrom, MIT…, Amazon…) ¿Quién se cree estos discursos? – Tú. ¿A quién le perjudica este “progreso”? – A ti.

[Siguiendo los discursos de Eric Sadin] ¿Cómo se presentan estos individuos? – En camiseta, vaqueros y deportivas. Dan una imagen amigable, de colega, de confianza (precisamente no se enuncian desde su pedestal de CEO “tradicional” (traje, relojes caros, zapatos brillantes), sino que se “rebajan” a tu altura, para que su mensaje cale más.

Porque Elon Musk es bro [palabras de mi hermano]

Ya no es el empresario tirano en su torre de marfil que te azota con su látigo. Ahora es el ingeniero amigable que escribe en Twitter y tiene los mismos problemas que tú (Mark Zuckerberg tiene pegatinas en la webcam y en el micrófono de su ordenador, just like you!)

[esto ya es irse por las ramas, pero] ¡Tú también puedes ser millonario! ¡Conoce la rutina de los millonarios! – Levántate a las 5, medita, luego sal a correr (por tu parcela del tamaño de un país), toma un buen desayuno (preparado por un chef de renombre). Es importante el tiempo en familia, “lleva” a tus hijos al colegio (privadísimo) (aunque tú no conduces, conduce tu chófer 24/7 [mira, otro trabajo que va a desaparecer, gracias Tesla]), sé productivo en el trabajo, enfócate en mejorar cada día (¡eres tu propio jefe[policía, verdugo, hermano mayor, profesor]!). al finalizar la jornada, relájate, busca un tiempo para ti mismo (mientras tu empleada filipina cuida de tus hijos), desconéctate de las redes, del teléfono…

Estas retóricas solo sirven si tu familia o tú tenéis dinero.

 Hay mucha problemática con que ya no veas al empresario como empresario sino como colega. Aquel por el que tienes que tener 2 trabajos (o más) para llegar a fin de mes, aquel que te echa para sustituirte por una máquina (robot, IA…) para sacar más rendimiento y acumular más capital. Elon Musk no es tu colega, no le importas. Si trabajases para él no dudes ni un solo segundo que te echaría si te pudiese reemplazar por algo más rentable (menor coste, más rendimiento, más producción, menos dolores de cabeza, menos derechos…)

A la máquina la posees (la compras) al humano no (bueno sí, pero no; está mal visto, a veces)

Es tecnofílico quien se lo puede permitir, la tecnofilia como privilegio. El mundo tecnologizado como espacio de privilegio (al hombre-blanco-cis-hetero-rico), dentro del sistema capitalista, globalista (mundialista, planetario¿?), heteropatriarcal. Obrero/patrón

Esto también puede relacionarse con la vida, las experiencias tecnológicamente mediadas. La condición humana y la experiencia, el error, la “libre elección”, sustituidas por un algoritmo que optimiza cada movimiento, pensamiento, interacción para “llevarte a una vida plena y feliz” (¿qué pasa con las enfermedades mentales?). ¿Qué pasa con las profesiones relacionadas con estos campos? (organizadores de eventos [24h host], personal shoppers, psicólogos, celestinas …)

[newstinxahoi]

Ant Group có thể mất 140 tỷ USD vốn hóa

Giới phân tích dự báo, vốn hóa của Ant Group có thể giảm một nửa, tương đương 140 tỷ USD vì hoãn IPO.

Các quy định mới của Bắc Kinh có thể buộc Ant phải huy động thêm vốn để hỗ trợ cho các khoản vay và xin thêm giấy phép hoạt động cho các chi nhánh trên toàn quốc. Theo Morningstar và các công ty khác, động thái này có thể khiến định giá Ant giảm một nửa so với 280 tỷ USD trước thềm IPO.

Nếu định giá giảm một nửa, giá trị của Ant thấp hơn hai năm trước – thời điểm nhận vốn từ một số quỹ hàng đầu thế giới gồm Warburg Pincus, Silver Lake Management và Temasek Holdings. Vốn hóa của Ant giảm sẽ khiến các ngân hàng đầu tư như China International Capital thu về các khoản phí thấp hơn.

Iris Tan, nhà phân tích t���i Morningstar cho rằng Ant có nguy mất 25-50% vốn hóa, nếu tỷ lệ giá cổ phiếu so với giá trị sổ sách trước IPO giảm còn ngang bằng với mức của các ngân hàng trên toàn cầu. Điều này đồng nghĩa với việc vốn hóa của Ant Group có thể giảm đến 140 tỷ USD. Hiện giá cổ phiếu của doanh nghiệp này được định giá bằng 4,4 lần giá trị sổ sách, trong khi tỷ lệ này là 2 lần với các ngân hàng.

Sanjay Jain, người đứng đầu bộ phận tài chính tại Aletheia Capital ước tính hệ số giá trên lợi nhuận (P/E) của Ant có thể giảm xuống khoảng 10 lần, bằng một nửa mục tiêu trước đó của công ty. Mức định giá mới sẽ đưa Ant về mức ngang các nhà băng có chất lượng tốt hơn.

Tuần trước, Trung Quốc đột ngột hoãn thương vụ IPO của Ant ngay trước ngày lên sàn tại Thượng Hải và Hong Kong. Đây có thể chỉ là khởi đầu cho kế hoạch Bắc Kinh kiềm chế sự bùng nổ của các fintech nước này.

Ant thống trị thị trường thanh toán Trung Quốc với ứng dụng Alipay. Doanh nghiệp của Jack Ma cũng đang vận hành quỹ Yu’ebao và nền tảng cho vay trực tuyến lớn nhất Trung Quốc. Các mảng kinh doanh khác của Ant gồm một đơn vị chấm điểm tín dụng và một hãng bảo hiểm.

Tú Anh (theo Bloomberg)

[waywardanchorgladiator]

PARRHESIA

.

.

ELISABETH MURDOCH IS AFRAID.

ELISABETH MURDOCH IS AFRAID OF LOSING HER EMPIRE.

THREE RELATED THREATS

ONE PARRHESIASTES

In ancient Greek parrhesia meant "to speak everything" and in ancient Hebrew the word evolved to mean "in face of the public.“ [1] The Parrhesiastes is the person who says everything. [2] (…) The speaker uses his freedom and chooses frankness instead of persuasion, truth instead of falsehood or silence, the risk of death instead of life and security, criticism instead of flattery, and moral duty instead of self-interest and moral apathy. [3] So you see, the parrhesiastes is someone who takes a risk. [4] This is the parrhesiastic discourse and standpoint in philosophy: it is the discourse of the irreducibility of truth, power, and ethos, and at the same time the discourse of their necessary relationship, of the impossibility of thinking aletheia, politeia, and ethos without their essential, fundamental relationship to each other. [5]

“I am afraid, Father. [6] I want to confess myself to you, have mercy, a devil is devouring my bowels! [7] I see your cell as no more than a frightful sepulchre where, instead of worms, remorse and despair come to gnaw at you and to turn your existence into a hell in anticipation. [8] In madness, (…) I myself am no longer normal, I lose my reason. [9]

Since the moment when I first came to feel what grandeur and perfection are, I find myself admitted to an advantage which may well bring one to despair: that of measuring the extent of these qualities. [10] This other world of knowledge, beauty, love or despair, I will only enter this true world, more real than real, guided by the happenstance of my wanderings in the wide open, between the mad laughs or the more frequent mad tears. [11] I never thought I had found a human ship going down in an ocean of despair, in a Sargasso of impotence. [12]

I am afraid, Father. [13] 

We rule over the entire globe by means of words; with easy effort we acquire for ourselves through trade all the treasures of the earth by means of words. [14] We keep our nature, which obeys and remains silent, on a leash. From time to time it barks and growls, but language, technology and knowledge flog it, bring it into subjection, calm it down. NOT ALWAYS. Just as a written advertising poster erases the landscape’s muteness, a meaningful word annihilates millions of carnal years. [15] But they don’t want us anymore. They want to bring down what you’ve built. Ever after, people would say: 

Murdochs, liars all. [16]“

ALETHEIA

This notion has a long history in the ancient wisdom and legal practices of Greece. [17] Yet today we translate aletheia as truth, even though it only used to express that renown sung of by Homer, whose narratives staged the sailor’s ruses and the warrior’s courage. [18] The new truth was set in opposition there to the ancient aletheia, that is to say, to collective glory, to the publics belief in the exploits of this person or that person, exploits sustained by dramatic facts, dense with sensationalism, terror and pity. [19] In other words, unconcealment or aletheia—this trinity of being present, being something, and omniscience—is not a matter of Platonic philosophy, but rather the bequest of the vocalic alphabet; although invented after the Iliad, it preceded the Odyssey. [20] To lead a “true life” will thus mean: to lead an entirely public and exposed life (the unhidden), an existence of destitution and complete poverty (the pure), a radically wild and animal life (the straight \droit\), and manifesting an unlimited sovereignty (the immutable). [21] And the value of truth in general, which always implies the presence of the signified (aletheia or adequatio), far from dominating this movement and allowing it to be thought, is only one of its epochs, however privileged. [22]

POLITEIA

The rule of law, of course, presupposes complete legality, but this is not enough: if a law gave the government unlimited power to act as it pleased, all its actions would be legal, but it would certainly not be under the rule of law. [23] When a tribunal or authority acquits or sentences a defendant, two fundamental things change: time and truth. [24] For more than social movements the question of justice is a question of temporality: justice is now, justice is against deferral; the space of deferral is the space of destructive violence. [25] Justice is founded on prescription. [26] And justice makes no inquiries. [27] What has to be arranged and calculated are the return effects of punishment on the punishing authority and the power that it claims to exercise. [28] Unfortunately it doesn’t do justice to the beauty and elegance of this extraordinary mechanism that fuels most of life. [29] Over time, all opposites will be destroyed through the work of justice, leading to a final state devoid of opposites. [30] Unlike physical reality, all mental reality is aimed at some object: to see is to see something; to judge is to judge some object; to love is to love someone or something. [31] Continuous adaptation, not equilibrium, is the rule. [32]

ETHOS

We set out from real, active human beings, and on the basis of their real life process we demonstrate the development of the ideological reflexes and echoes of this life process. The phantoms formed in the human brain are also, necessarily, sublimates of their material life process, which is empirically verifiable and bound to material premises. Morality religion, metaphysics, all the rest of ideology and their corresponding forms of consciousness, thus no longer retain their semblance of independence. [33] The bourgeoisie is constantly absorbing into its ideology a whole section of humanity which does not have its basic status and cannot live up to it except in imagination, that is, at the cost of an immobilization and an impoverishment of consciousness. [34] Consciousness is no longer special, but just a special case of the relation between part and whole. [35] Temporality simply refers to the simultaneously concealed (or “past”) character of entities and their revealed (or “future”) aspect combining into a single ambiguous present. [36] One can always say that it is just a matter of foggy talk and ideology, nothing but ideology. [37] This means neither that we can do without ideology nor that science is more valuable than ideology. [38] Ideology is not just in your head. [39] It is neither a history of mentality, nor of behaviour. [40]

“Let’s invite them to my new palace in Paris. I want to hear them sing and make them dance. [41] And if everyone finds it as authoritative as I do, I am confident it will convince any adversary that I may have. [42]“

Paris is the synonym of Cosmos, Paris is Athens, Sybaris, Jerusalem, Pantin. [43] The taste of Paris has shown itself concordant with that of Athens.’ Given this normative cohesion of rational and emotive values over two thousand years, the writer, the architect, the painter of public scenes can imitate originally. [44] For nothing must be flattered, not even a great people; where there is everything there is also ignominy by the side of sublimity; and, if Paris contains Athens, the city of light, Tyre, the city of might, Sparta, the city of virtue, Nineveh, the city of marvels, it also contains Lutetia, the city of mud. [45] The same Homer, who pleased at Athens and Rome two thousand years ago, is still admired at Paris (…). [46] And in that sense, it could be a universal substitute (…), [47] a new place for the parrhesiates. The best words to express these requirements are those of the French Revolution: Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite. [48] The face of the French Revolution is the contemporary face of parrhesia. As Liberte corresponds to aletheia and Egalite to politeia, Fraternite does so to ethos.

It is Notre Dame the people are besieging. [49] An Egyptian temple does not belong in Athens or a Greek one in Memphis or, for that matter, in Paris: "One may build very elegant, very well lighted Greek temples for the purpose of assembling the good people of Saint Louis and causing them to worship a metaphysical God, but they will always long for these Notre Dame (…) of Paris (…). [50]

“How (...) can I describe that palace (…)? [51] This palace must be the work of the gods, was my first thought. [52]“

Since it is expected of a royal household that it should differ from a fortress in almost every respect, and certainly in the most important ones, the palace must be linked to a fortress, so that in emergencies a king will not be without a fortress, nor a tyrant without a palace for his entertainment. [53] But this is how they differ: A royal palace should be sited in the city center, should be of easy access, and should be gracefully decorated, elegant, and refined, rather than ostentatious. [54] The Rarity and Beauty of the Stone itself will also add greatly to the Ornament; as for Instance, if it is that sort of Marble, with which we are told Nero built a Temple to Fortune in his golden Palace, which was so white, so clear and transparent, that even when all the Doors were shut the Light seemed to be enclose within the Temple. [55] Neither is it foreign to our present Purpose just to mention, that Octavianus, the Emperor, adorned his Palace with the huge Bones of some extraordinary Animals. [56] It should also have beams, capitals, and other such ornaments. [57] Next, it will be of advantage if they take pleasure in poets and orators, for these have many ornaments in common with the painter. [58] Other ornaments done by artificers that are added to painting, such as sculpted columns, bases and pediments, I would not censure if they were in real silver and solid or pure gold, for a perfect and finished painting is worthy to be ornamented even with precious stones. [59] The columns here should be freestanding, their lineaments taken from the basilica. [60]

We shall now describe compartition, which contributes more to the delight and splendor of a building than to its utility and strength; although these qualities are so closely related that if one is found wanting in anything, the rest will not meet with approval. [61] (…) Every building must have a locality, area, compartition, wall, roof, and opening. [62] According to the first quantity, and then to the measures. Such is order. According to the correspondence of the measures. Such is compartition, or to use. Such is distribution. [63] It will therefore be a just and proper Compartition, if it is neither confused nor interrupted, neither too rambling nor composed of unsuitable Parts, and if the Members be neither too many nor too few, neither too small nor too large, nor mis matcht nor unsightly, nor as it were separate and divided from the Rest of the Body. [64] Compartition, therefore, will be seemly when it is neither jumpy, nor confused, nor disorganized, nor disconnected, nor composed of incongruous elements; it should be made up of members neither too numerous, nor too small, nor too large, nor too dissonant or ungraceful, nor too disjointed or distant from the rest of the body, as it were. [65]

“Father, I hope I will hear them sing and make them dance. [66]“

[1] Forensic Architecture, Forensis The Architecture of Public Truth. [2] Michael Foucault, The Courage of the Truth. [3] Michael Foucault, Fearless Speech. [4] Michael Foucault, Fearless Speech. [5] Michael Foucault, The Courage of the Truth. [6] Eco, The Name of the Rose. [7] Eco, The Name of the Rose. [8] Foucault, Discipline and Punish. [9] Zizek, Less Than Nothing. [10] Harrison Wood Gaiger, Art in Theory 1648 1815. [11] Serres, Biogea. [12] Deleuze Guattari, A Thousand Plateaus. [13] Eco, The Name of the Rose. [14] Harrison Wood Gaiger, Art in Theory 1648 1815. [15] Serres, The Incandescent. [16] Calasso, The Marriage of Cadmus and Harmony. [17] Henaff, The Price of Truth. [18] Serres, Hominescence. [19] Serres, Hominescence. [20] Kittler, The Truth of the Technological World. [21] Foucault, The Courage of the Truth. [22] Derrida, Of Grammatology. [23] Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty. [24] Serres, History of Scientific Thought. [25] Braidotti Hlavajova, Posthuman Glossary. [26] Buehlmann, Mathematics and Information in the Philosophy of Michel Serres. [27] Hugo, Les Miserables. [28] Foucault, Discipline and Punish. [29] West, Scale The Universal Laws of Growth. [30] Harman, Bells and Whistles. [31] Harman, Bells and Whistles. [32] West, Scale The Universal Laws of Growth. [33] Hays, Architecture Theory since 1968. [34] Barthes, Mythologies. [35] Harman, Towards Speculative Realism. [36] Harman, Bells and Whistles. [37] Deleuze Guattari, A Thousand Plateaus. [38] Hays, Architecture Theory since 1968. [39] Morton, Hyperobjects. [40] Deleuze, Foucault. [41] Hugo, Les Miserables. [42] Mallgrave, Architectural Theory. [43] Hugo, Les Miserables. [44] Steiner, After Babel Aspects of Language and Translation. [45] Hugo, Les Miserables. [46] Harrison Wood Gaiger, Art in Theory 1648 1815. [47] Foucault, History of Madness. [48] Wiener, The Human Use Of Human Beings. [49] Hugo, Notre Dame de Paris. [50] Frankl, The Gothic. [51] Harrison Wood Gaiger, Art in Theory 1648 1815. [52] Borges, Collected Fictions. [53] Alberti, On the Art of Building in Ten Books 1988. [54] Alberti, On the Art of Building in Ten Books 1988. [55] Alberti, 10 books of architecture 1755. [56] Alberti, 10 books of architecture 1755. [57] Alberti, On the Art of Building in Ten Books 1988. [58] Alberti, On Painting. [59] Alberti, On Painting. [60] Alberti, On the Art of Building in Ten Books 1988. [61] Alberti, On the Art of Building in Ten Books 1988. [62] Alberti, On the Art of Building in Ten Books 1988. [63] Williams, Daniele Barbaros Vitruvius of 1567. [64] Alberti, 10 books of architecture 1755. [65] Alberti, On the Art of Building in Ten Books 1988. [66] Hugo, Les Miserables.

[fx999blog]

黄金周评：美联储负利率预期首现，多头欲攻城拔寨，奈何连遭多重利空压制 © Reuters. 黄金周评：美联储负利率预期首现，多头欲攻城拔寨，奈何连遭多重利空压制 刚刚过去的一周，现货黄金主要呈现高位震���走势，欧美国家逐步重启经济打压避险情绪，令金价承压，金价一度跌至1682附近，但市场对美国就业数据的预期较大，利率期货历史上首次出现美联储将降至负利率的预期，金价一度升至1722.07位置，但最终美国非农就业报告好于预期，而且中美全面经济对话中方牵头人刘鹤应约与美贸易代表莱特希泽、财政部长姆努钦通话，市场对国际担忧情绪降温，金价最终回落至1700关口附近；收报1702.70美元/盎司，周线涨幅0.22%。 史上首现！美国利率期货市场开始消化负利率，美元上行受阻，支撑金价 除了就业市场持续出现疲软的信号，其他经济数据显示美国第一季度生产率创2015年来最大降幅，同时上周消费者舒适度指数连续第七周下滑，3月份消费者借贷创2010年来最大降幅，凸显了在疫情的冲击下，美国经济下行的压力加剧。受悲观预期影响，美国利率期货市场首次开始消化从12月开始略微为负的利率环境，在四个交易日上涨至100关口上方后，美元指数再次回落至100关口下方，这一度帮助金价创下本周高点1722.22美元/盎司。 (美元指数日线图) IMF前首席经济学家Kenneth Rogoff指出，为了拯救经济，美联储应该采取负利率；负利率将使许多公司、州和城市免于违约。如果操作正确，负利率的作用将与正常的货币政策类似，能够提振总需求、增加就业。 美东时间7日周四美股早盘时段，美国联邦基金期货2021年1月合约价格升破100.00，显示联邦基金期货市场交易者预计，美联储可能在明年1月被迫将政策利率联邦基金利率降为-0.002%。 不过，从目前美联储官员的表态来看，美联储实施负利率的可能性还比较小，这也使得金价的上涨空间受到了一些限制。美联储哈克表示，在此次危机期间，负利率不会对经济产生影响。 香港ALETHEIA CAPITAL首席分析师JIM WALKER(5月6日)称：在货币政策怪人中，有很多人谈论的是(美联储的)要实施收益率曲线控制政策。这是有可能的。美联储并未采取负利率政策，也已表示不会实施负利率，而是扩大了资产负债表规模。如果不得不实施负利率，那么美国的货币市场基金将会崩盘。 SMBC日兴证券驻东京首席市场经济学家丸山义正表示，市场消化美联储负政策利率的走势过头了而且没有意义，因为央行政策更侧重于遏制债务供应增加造成的收益率上升。 蒙特利尔银行分析师Jon Hill认为，某些联邦基金期货合约现在的隐含收益率为负，鲍威尔需要决定他是否要把这种可能性扼杀在萌芽状态，如果联邦公开市场委员会拖得太久，他们可能会产生一种自我实现的动力，或者不得不在以后的道路上有效地执行鹰派美联储的讲话；仍认为美联储不大可能实施负利率，在上次新闻发布会上，鲍威尔曾三次将当前的目标区间称为有效下界，含蓄地承认了进一步削减目标范围将弄巧成拙。 金价下行压力增加，因经济逐渐重启、国际贸易局势担忧降温、非农好于预期 金价本周多次试探顶破1722附近阻力的压制，但最终都已失败告终，最终勉强守在1700关口附近，而且从市场情绪和走势图来看，金价短线面临的下行风险显著增加。 利空1：各国陆续解除封锁措施提振市场风险偏好； 5月份以来，全球多个国家逐步重启经济，市场风险偏向显著回升，全球股市普遍上周，美国纳斯达克指数连续第五个交易日上涨，收复了2020年以来的全部跌幅，也是自2019年12月以来持续时间最长的一次涨势。恐慌指数VIX大跌约25%，创九周新低；显然，黄金的避险需求也受到了一定的压制。 (恐慌指数VIX日线图) 本周初，意大利开始解除实施了八周的封锁政策，400多万意大利工人重返工厂、建筑工地和其他工作岗位。同时本周德国总理默克尔宣布，随着该国开始放松封锁措施，第一波疫情已经过去。德国16个州的州同意开放更多商店，两户人家间可以互相拜访，德甲足球联赛可以在本月恢复。 荷兰首相Rutte也表示，荷兰已经度过疫情的第一阶段。荷兰正在放松针对疫情的封锁政策，并重新开放经济。荷兰的目标是，6月1日开始对所有表现出感染症状的人进行检测。 当地时间5月6日晚，塞尔维亚国民议会通过表决，废除紧急状态，即从7日���不再有宵禁，但仍保留相关疫情防控措施。 巴黎市长伊达尔戈透露巴黎5月11日解除居家隔离令的计划，包括使换乘公交车汽车停车位增加一倍、增加自行车车道和小学14日起复课等内容。市长特别提到咖啡馆、酒吧和餐馆的问题，称将会允许这些商家免费使用街道，甚至整条街道的公共空间，增加它们的营业空间，还将为它们设立“免税区。 英国首相约翰逊将在当地时间周日19:00（北京时间周一凌晨02:00）公布解除封锁措施的路线图。 据观察，本周欧洲斯托克600指数本周上涨1%，美国标普500指数本周上涨4%逼近近八周高位，上证A股本周上涨1.23%创七周新高；投资者需要继续关注欧美国家经济重启情况和疫情进展，以及市场风险偏好的变化。 (美国标普500指数周线图) 利空2：国际贸易担忧情绪降温 据新华社报道，5月8日上午，中共中央政治局委员、国务院副总理、中美全面经济对话中方牵头人刘鹤应约与美贸易代表莱特希泽、财政部长姆努钦通话。双方表示应加强宏观经济和公共卫生合作，努力为中美第一阶段经贸协议的落实创造有利氛围和条件，推动取得积极成效。双方同意保持沟通协调。 利空3：美国非农就业报告好于预期 美国公布的就业数据略好于预期，4月非农就业岗位减少2050万个，低于预期的2200万，这也令黄金的吸引力受限。失业率为14.7%，低于预估的16%。 尽管如此，总体而言，美国经济遭遇了自大萧条(Great Depression)以来最大的月度就业岗位降幅，这是迄今为止最明显的迹象，表明新冠病毒大流行正在打击世界上最大的经济体。 High Ridge Futures金属交易总监David Meger表示：“尽管就业岗位降幅显然是很大的，这是我们这个国家有史以来最糟糕的数字，但在这背后，我们看到了一点乐观情绪，因美国经济正在缓慢重启。” (现货黄金日线图) 后市前瞻——机构和散户仍普遍看涨后市 根据周五(5月8日)Kitco发布的调查显示，机构和散户据偏向看涨黄金后市，11位华尔街专业人士中有6位(55%)表示他们看好未来一周的前景。三位专业人士(27%)预计金价将下滑，两位专业人士(18%)持中立态度。 与此同时，面向普通投资者的一项在线投票显示，共有750人参与投票��共有502位投资者(67%)预计下周金价将上涨。另有139人(19%)持下跌预期，109人(15%)持中性看法。 接下来的一周，首先要留意美国非农就业数据的影响发酵情况和国际贸易局势的相关消息，以及海外新冠疫情的进展和经济重启情况；其次则需要关注一系列经济数据，如中美4月CPI数据、澳大利亚就业数据、欧元区一季度GDP和美国4月零售销售数据，此外，新西兰联储利率决议也将是市场的关注点之一，原油投资者需要重点关注EIA、OPEC和IEA原油市场三大月度报告。 目前比较大的可能是，未来一周前半周全球股市仍有一定的上涨机会，对金价不利，但随着更多糟糕经济数据的出炉，股市的涨势可能受到影响，金价可能会重新获得逢低买盘的支撑。

[bk-lostintranslation]

ESSAY: "Mad, Bad, & Dangerous to Know"- Narratives of Female Killers in Law & Media

The accepted roles of women continue to be those of nurturers, and idealized conceptions of womanhood remain tied to vulnerability, gentleness and self-sacrifice. Consequently, the element of female violence becomes doubly jarring. 

X-Posted to Aletheia

In both reality and virtuality, the phenomenon of the 'female killer' is imbued with the illicit charisma of transgression. History is woven with literary and cinematic portrayals of women who kill, their personas mythologized until they have become staples in the popular imagination.  Biblical archetypes such as Lilith, Salome and Jezebel are steeped in evocative subtext of the predacious, pre-patriarchal feminine entity. Similarly, the tautological relationship between the femme fatale and the film noir genre has long since been established, with the femme serving almost as a repository of everything irresistibly devious, yet simultaneously aberrant to the prescribed roles of her gender.  Indeed, when perusing any account of female murderers, from fictive to real-life, there is an implicit sense that violence is the realm of the masculine. Women who traverse into this sphere, therefore, are aberrations – not just at the societal but the biological level. Although 'femininity' is an ever-evolving concept, it remains entrenched in patriarchal presuppositions. The accepted roles of women continue to be those of nurturers, and idealized conceptions of womanhood remain tied to vulnerability, gentleness and self-sacrifice. Consequently, the element of female violence becomes doubly jarring. It challenges society to reassess its established standards of sex/gender, exposing the deeply-embedded binarizations and prejudices still in play.

 In order to rationalize the seemingly arbitrary behaviors of female murderers, two stock narratives are often employed by law, media and fiction. Known predominantly as the "mad/bad" dichotomy, this construction can be traced as far back as Lombroso and Ferrerro's seminal criminological work, The Female Offender. Intended to explain non-stereotypical female crimes, such as homicide and filicide, Lombroso first delineates the essence of "normal womanhood" – a paragon of passivity, guided by pure maternal instinct and utterly devoid of sexual desire.  Women who depart from this definition are "closer to [men]... than to the normal woman," yet the masculinization does not elevate them shoulder-to-shoulder with their male counterparts. Rather, the criminal woman is a hybridized sub-species closer to children and animals.  Firstly, as a creature of "undeveloped intelligence," she is riven by irresistible impulses and ungovernable emotions, thus susceptible to "Crimes of Passion/Mad Frenzy." Secondly, she exhibits a "diabolical" cruelty that far exceeds that of the male criminal, owing to a biological predisposition wherein her "evil tendencies are more numerous and varied than men's" (31-183). As Lombroso sums up,

"...in women, as in children, the moral sense is inferior... That which differentiates woman from the child is maternity and compassion; thanks to these, she has no fondness for evil for evil's sake (unlike the child, who will torture animals and so on.) Instead... she develops a taste for evil only under exceptional circumstances, as for example when she is impelled by an outside force or has a perverse character (80).

While such gendered contradistinctions have long since fallen into disfavor in criminological research, the "mad frenzy" versus "diabolical" categories continue to determine how female violence is portrayed in both media and legal discourse. Described by Brickey and Comack as a "master status template," these trajectories of 'mad' or 'bad' either victimize or pathologize female offenders, displacing the focus off the crime and onto the woman's inability to fit into predesigned boxes of normality, and more significantly, femininity (167). For instance, in the 'mad' polarity, the woman's agency is diminished in favor of painting her as a victim: "depressed," "traumatized," "deranged," and ultimately at the mercy of her emotions. It glosses over the killer's responsibility as an equal citizen under the law, falling back on archaic feminine tropes of passivity and helplessness that serve only to reinforce gender stereotypes. Granted, while mental illness can and has been a valid defense against culpability, it proves problematic when it reduces women who kill to Lombrosian roles of primitive infantalism. They are not dynamic actors in their own right, but tragic casualties of female physiology gone awry. On the 'bad' end of the spectrum, female killers are subsequently masculinized as per Lombroso's model, then stripped of all 'womanly' attributes, i.e. morality, kindness, delicacy. The language employed by media, literature and law alike tends to vilify them as deviants, beyond redemption or reform – and thus beyond the realm of humanity (Cranford 1426).

Both these approaches prove detrimental for a number of reasons. First, they force attention away from treating female offenders as nuanced singularities whose motivations are fluid and complex. Second, an outsized focus on their perceived biological or psychological failings does not offer a broader understanding of criminogenic behaviors at a macro-structural level. Indeed, it can be argued that such simplistic typologies as 'Victim' or 'Monster' serve only to highlight and feed harmful gender stereotypes, reducing these women to grotesque spectacles of 'Otherness' based on their deviance from the discursive framework of femininity.

To be sure, women who kill are statistically rare. Data compiled by the Federal Bureau of Investigation from 2003-2012 revealed that males carried out the lion's share of homicides at 88% ("Ten Year Arrest Trends by Sex").  When filtered through the designative lens of serial murder, i.e. "…a series of three or more killings… having common characteristics such as to suggest the reasonable possibility that the crimes were committed by the same actor," the number of female offenders dwindles further ("Serial Murder" 7).  In his work, Female Serial Killers: How and Why Women Become Monsters, Peter Vronsky remarks that only one in almost every six serial killers in the USA is a woman (3-5). Studies conducted in the early 1990s also revealed that men were six to seven times likelier to kill others – strangers or relatives – than women (D'Orbán 560-571; Kellermann et al. 1-5). Similarly, Harrison and others found substantial effect sizes between both genders, in addition to marked sex differences in their modi operandi, i.e. males conforming to a "hunter" strategy of stalking and killing, while women resort to "gatherer" behaviors by targeting victims in their direct milieu for profit-based motives (295-306).

While these findings might explain the tenacious constructions of femininity – and subsequent 'deviance' – that still cling to the overall subject of female killers, they do not excuse them. Indeed, it can be argued that popular media portrayals of women who kill further fuel these stereotypes. News, infotainment and cinema alike employ a highly effective formula whose pivotal components are simplification, sex, violence and graphic imagery (Jewkes 43-60). Female killers cannot fully satisfy this sensationalist criterion except as caricatures. Otherwise, as highly complex and richly variegated individuals, their existence would prove to be a messy fissure within the neat constructions of gender and power dynamics – a status quo that the media arguably serves to reaffirm and maintain (Kirby 165-178).

It is unsurprising, then, that a marked dichotomy can be observed in the portrayals of male versus female killers. As previously noted, male serial killers are believed to exhibit "hunting" behaviors, with their crimes seen as the evolutionary offshoot of "unconscious drives" (Harrison 304-6). Applying this hypothesis under the aegis of patriarchy, men who kill subsequently become distortions of the masculine ideal: the quintessential hunter.  The nature of their crimes is at once instrumental and agentic; their actions are rooted in destructive hypermasculinity – but masculinity all the same. Their actions are shocking, but in their own way they serve as paradigms of nonconformity. They have broken free from the artificial constraints of society, rejecting the very source that dares to judge them. Certainly, for Lombroso, the male killer was often coupled with genius, and his deviance linked to retrograde evolution, wherein his sloughing-off of societal norms, and ultimately sanity, was a biological reaction to being excessively endowed with high intellect. For Lombroso, while female killers were a biological anomaly, the males were often a trailblazing nexus between exceptionality and atavistic brutality – "creators of new forms of crime, inventors of evil" (74). In their book, The Murder Mystique: Female Killers and Popular Culture, Laurie Nalepa and Richard Pfefferman remark that:

Murderers are not heroes. But killing— whether motivated by passion, greed, thrills, madness, ideals, or desperation— is an extraordinary act; not an honorable one, to be sure, but undeniably extraordinary. And extraordinary acts— even depraved ones— tend to have the effect of elevating the perpetrator to iconic cultural status (4).

It is unsurprising, then, that the media deifies such individuals by capitalizing on their very notoriety. They are bestowed catchy yet edgy nicknames such as Boston Strangler, Skid Row Slasher, Night Stalker, etc. Their exploits receive exuberant, stylized coverage, while their actions are profiled and dissected to the point where they eclipse needful attention to their victims. History recalls with a horrified yet titillated clarity the names of Jeffrey Dahmer, Charles Manson, Ted Bundy and Richard Ramirez. However, their victims are seldom so fervently immortalized. The implication is that these killers are superstars within their own sensationalist dramas, whereas their victims function as mere props to drive the narrative forward. As Lisa Downing notes in her book, The Subject of Murder: Gender, Exceptionality, and the Modern Killer, "...a pervasive idea obtains in modern culture that there is something intrinsically different, unique, and exceptional about those subjects who kill. Like artists and geniuses, murderers are considered special ... individual agents" (1).

Cinema, too, reinforces the phenomenon by lending male killers, both real and fictional, a disreputable mystique – often elevating them to the status of cult fixtures. Examples of this trend include the critically-acclaimed American Psycho, which juxtaposes orgiastic violence with careless misogyny, but is nonetheless lauded as a masterpiece of urban self-satire, as well as the fast-paced psychedelia of Natural Born Killers, where chaotic murder-sprees are translated as thrilling acts of rebellion and self-expression against a hypocritical society. Similarly, the mythic Hannibal Lector, in Jonathan Demme's Silence of the Lambs, is portrayed as a ruthless strategist whose skills, while undoubtedly evil, can also be harnessed for good because of their collective desirability. Lector the killer may be abhorrent and ghoulish; however, Lector the man holds something of an esoteric appeal. His very transgressions serve to glamorize him as a shadowy figure of fascination and reverence (Roy 61-92).

The cinematic emphasis on male killers as paradigms of intelligence and charisma doesn't extend to pure fiction. Recent docufilms such as Joe Berlinger's Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil and Vile – which focuses on the exploits of real-life serial killer Ted Bundy, as played by the photogenically clean-cut Zac Effron – further underscore the tendency to glamorize male killers. As Anne Cohen notes, far from throwing a necessary spotlight on Bundy's victims, the film reduces them to irrelevant footnotes against a fawning narrative of Bundy's private life, as served up from the POV of his then-girlfriend Elizabeth Kendall.  While the film's original intent may be to illustrate how Bundy's boy-next-door glibness could successfully fool his intimate circle, it arguably overshoots the mark by romanticizing Bundy to the extent that the audience becomes just as infatuated with him as Elizabeth.  As Cohen states, "There's only so many times we can watch Ted’s tender acceptance of [Elizabeth] as a single mother, his devotion to her daughter Molly, his thoughtful gestures — cooking breakfast, playing in the snow, wearing a lame birthday hat — before we… start to feel enamored" (1). The subsequent backlash after the biopic's premiere, coupled with the perverse flurry of online admiration it rekindled for Bundy, is a classic case of the film's message becoming lost in translation (Millard 1). It also serves as a potent reminder that framing, whether intentional or accidental, allows male killers to invariably maintain the pedestal of cultural obsessions. As critic Richard Lawson puts it,

It’s indeed a wicked bit of casting. In addition to his heinous crimes, Bundy was famed for being disarmingly good-looking and charming. But he certainly wasn’t an Efron-level sun-god—so Efron’s presence in the movie lends the proceedings an extra otherworldliness, heightening the insidious appeal of American serial-killer lore to something almost pornographic (1).

Ultimately, whether biopic or fiction, these films swim through similar undercurrents: within a patriarchal framework, the male killer is a magnetic symbol of human impulse. A dark reflection of reality, certainly – but not, as is the case with female killers, a deflection of it.  In contrast, paradigmatic examples of female killers as Lombrosian aberrations exist abundantly in film. Cinematic classics such as Basic Instinct and Fatal Attraction both feature psychopathic female leads, their much-vaunted sex appeal serving as a sinister smokescreen for their more bloodthirsty agendas. Underpinning their sanguinary appetites however, is the implicit strain of 'deviance' that first lures in, then terrorizes, their hapless victims. In Basic Instinct, Sharon Stone's neo-noir femme fatale Catherine Tramell is portrayed as a bisexual, hard-partying thrill-seeker who indulges solely in her own mordant whims. Every facet of her character serves to scandalize the audience – a framing that calls to attention the more docile, morally acceptable standards of femininity, as well as their ubiquity and pervasiveness within society.

However, for all Tramell's seductive dynamism, it is arguable whether hers is an empowering or feminist icon. Her body serves too blatantly as an erotic spectacle for male fantasy, effectively displacing her more human complexities (if they exist at all.) While Berlinger's Extremely Wicked offsets Bundy's erotic charge with a trickster's charm, and humanized nuances of emotion, Tramell's character remains a succubic enigma from start to finish.  If anything, she appears to function as a two-pronged warning for male viewers. Firstly, that uncontrolled, untamed and non-heteronormative female sexuality is intrinsically rooted in criminality (Davies and Smith, 105-107). Secondly, that independent and sexually-dominant women are only palatable when their characters are flattened into pornographic caricatures (Meyers 300). In her book, The Dominance of the Male Gaze in Hollywood Films, Isabelle Fol remarks that the film "... appeals in particular to men to avoid deviant women and settle for a homely girl in order to evade the castration threat" (69).

This fact is seemingly underscored by the film's ultimate, ambiguous scene, where Stone and Douglas' characters are locked in a voracious embrace in bed. A foreboding, Hitchcock-esque refrain rises to crescendo and the camera pans down to reveal an ice-pick – Tramell's weapon of choice – concealed beneath the bed. It is through this scene that Tramell's inherent irredeemability asserts itself most explicitly. Granted, she eludes the fate inevitable to a majority of Hollywood vamps – death as fitting punishment for rejecting the traditional roles of womanhood. However, by no means has she been 'cured' by the hero's love. If anything, the scene highlights her perpetual threat as the castrator. The moment the male protagonist fails to satisfy her, she will dispose of him with brutal efficiency before moving on to her next victim. In that sense, she is the 'bad' female killer par excellence, her perceived deviance serving only to reaffirm the status quo rather than dismantle it.

Similarly, Fatal Attraction follows a well-known cinematic formula. A flawed but sympathetic hero – Michael Douglas' philandering Dan Gallagher – is beguiled, bedded then ultimately betrayed by the volatile femme fatale, who refuses to be relegated to an inconsequential fling and instead seeks to invade every sphere of his life, with the intent of eclipsing the very bedrock of patriarchal stability: the nuclear family. In doing so, the femme becomes, by her very nature, deviant – and must be quashed for the threat of chaos she represents. Certainly, the film goes to great lengths to paint Glen Close's character – the seductive and mysterious Alex Forest – as an unstable force who upends the hero's life with escalating levels of terror. An outspoken career woman, Forest also serves as the perfect foil for Gallager's more docile wife Beth – a whore/madonna dualism that is nearly as prevalent in cinema and literature as the mad/bad dichotomy.

Of course, where the latter is concerned, Forest is emphatically depicted as 'mad.' Her behavior is increasingly irrational and demanding, ranging from plaintive entreaties to Dan to return to her, to obsessively calling him at work and at home, to playing on his sense of guilt by announcing she is pregnant with his child, to throwing acid at his car, to killing and boiling his daughter's pet rabbit, to ultimately attacking his wife Beth in her bathroom. The film's penultimate scene, where she is shot dead by Beth after a frantic, bloody struggle with Dan, is represented as both triumphant and wholly justified. The survival of the male hero, as well as the continued sanctity of the family, is contingent on the demonization of the 'Other Woman' – and on her violent expulsion from the narrative. The film's final, lingering shot of the Gallaghers' family portrait acts as a sanctimonious reminder of who the audience is meant to cheer for, from beginning to end. In her book, International Relations Theory: A Critical Introduction, Cynthia Weber notes that, 

...Fatal Attraction is far from a gender-neutral tale. It is the tale of one man's reaction to unbounded feminine emotion (the film's symbolic equivalent for feminism) which he views as excessive and unbalanced. And his reaction is a reasonable one ... because it is grounded in Dan's (and many viewers') respect for traditional family. ... Alex has a very different story to tell about her affair with Dan, one that the film works hard to de-legitimize (96).

Taken individually, the narratives of these films – rooted in facile, frivolous fantasy – hardly seem to warrant academic scrutiny. However, central to their criticism is the idea of reflection theory, which purports that mass media is a prism through which core cultural values shine through, combining misinformation and mythology into a seamless real-life spectrum (Tuchman et al. 150-174). That the media bears a cumulative, subliminal impact on its viewers goes without saying. However, so prevalent is its influence on how we perceive gender-traits that we also fail to question the ubiquitous, ultimately harmful constructions concerning women and deviance at both judicial and psychological levels (Gilbert 1271–1300). In their work, Judge, Lawyer, Victim, Thief, renowned criminologists Nicole Hahn Rafter and Elizabeth Anne Stanko remark that one-dimensional portrayals of women in media not only feed damaging cultural assumptions, but also contribute to countless "controlling images" in the sphere of criminal justice. Pigeonholed into tidy categories such as "woman as the pawn of biology," "woman as passive and weak," "woman as impulsive and nonanalytic," "woman as impressionable and in need of protection," "the active woman as masculine," and the "criminal woman as purely evil," these images saturate legal literature and obstruct worthwhile theoretical discourse. More to the point, they lead to sentencing outcomes where impartial justice often takes the backseat to parochial presumptions (1-6).

While it is tempting to succumb to the notion that sentencing guidelines in criminal law are based on airtight logic and objective fact, discretion—and its arguable corollary of discrimination—remains pivotal in shaping legal policy. The law is neither impartial nor inviolate, but as weighed by normative baggage and sociocultural discursivity as any other man-made construct.  As Tara Smith remarks, "Law's meaning is not objective, and law's authority is not objective. The "objective" on its view, simply is: that which certain people would say that it is" (159).  With that in mind, the actors in court (judge, jury, prosecution, defense) can sometimes play roles that are as rooted in confirmation-bias through the prism of storytelling as they are in factualism. Typologies such as 'mad/bad' can serve as legal polemics against non-stereotypical female crimes, creating blurred lines between lived events and textual constructions as truth. More importantly, the evidence itself can go beyond context-specifity, not standing alone so much as being subject to common-sense fallacies of personal interpretation. As Bernard Jackson remarks,

...triers of fact [i.e. judges, or, in some countries, the jury] reach their decisions on the basis of two judgements; first an assessment is made of the plausibility of the prosecution's account of what happened and why, and next it is considered whether this narrative account can be anchored by way of evidence to common-sense beliefs which are generally accepted as true most of the time (10).

Two particularly notorious cases of female killers, which illustrate the simplistic narratives employed by law and media, are those of Aileen Wournos and Andrea Yates. In each instance, the women committed crimes of a similarly egregious magnitude. However, swayed by a rash of emotive media coverage, where one woman's perceived fragility was poignantly spotlighted while the other was emblazoned as a remorseless outcast, both women received opposite – and in the eyes of the public, apposite – sentences. Aileen Wuornos, for example, was fallaciously touted as the first 'postmodern' female serial killer – a gender-averted Ted Bundy. Working as a smalltime prostitute in Daytona Beach, Florida, Wuornos was charged with the murder of seven male 'Johns' between 1989 and 1990. In each case, the victims were shot at point blank range with Wuornos' .22 pistol. During her prolonged and extraordinarily-publicized trial, Wuornos' rationale for killing the men would vary. Initially, she claimed to have committed the murders in self-defense, as the men either had or were about to rape her. Later on, her accounts took on a darker, more mercenary tinge, with her motives rooted in theft and revenge.  After ten years on death row, she was ultimately executed by lethal injection in 2002. So mesmerizingly grotesque was Wuornos' misfit persona – at least as it was painted by the media – that her murder-spree served as inspiration for the Oscar-winning film Monster, a title that seems at once apt and ironic.

On the other hand, Andrea Yates was a housewife in Houston, Texas, who was charged in 2001 with committing filicide on her five children by drowning them in the bathtub. Yates was suffering from post-partum psychosis which, coupled with extreme religious values, led her to believe she was under the influence of Satan, and that by killing her children, she was saving them from hell. Having called 911 shortly after her crime, then confessing once the police arrived, she was convicted of capital murder. Her case was at once highly publicized and polarized, with many condemning her actions while others sought to neutralize her culpability by focusing on her mental illness. The media, in particular, seized upon the latter aspect to portray Yates as a beleaguered and misguided woman whose crimes were merely a distorted translation of mother-love. Initially pronounced guilty, she was nonetheless spared the death penalty, and sentenced to life in prison with the possibility of parole. In 2005, the verdict was overturned based on the erroneous testimony of an expert psychiatric witness. In her retrial the following year, Yates was found not guilty by reason of insanity, and committed to North Texas State Hospital (Williams 1). She currently continues to receive medical treatment at Kerrville State Hospital ("Where in Andrea Yates now?" 1)

From an objective standpoint, it could be argued that Yates' crimes were diametrically opposed to Wuornos' on the murder spectrum. The latter had no intimate connection to her victims. They were adult strangers – albeit ones who reportedly sought to harm her. Yates victims, on the other hand, all but epitomized stark, jarring helplessness: five children ranging from seven years to six months old. During their court trials, both the women's histories of mental illness were presented as mitigating factors. Yet the outcomes of both cases were vastly different – owing, at least in part, to the different ways in which deviance and agency were conflated, then used to either repudiate or amplify each killer's crimes based on Lombrosian-style archetypes (Nalepa et al 137). As mentioned previously, Lombroso, one of the earliest proponents of pathologizing female criminals, believed that women were by default amoral, with their redeeming feature being their maternal instincts.  Devoid of this quality, the masculinized criminal female was ten times deadlier than the male, and inherently irredeemable (183). Despite the outdatedness of this paradigm, a thorough examination of the semantic fields forged by media and law reveals its disturbing prevalence during both Yates and Wuornos' trials. Each woman's description, peppered with loaded language and equivocal statements, served almost as implicit invitations to the jury and bystanders alike to mold the story into the most suitable configuration by filling in its gaps.

In Andrea Yates' case, the media seized upon her status as a housewife, former nurse and high school valedictorian to symbolically separate her from the flagitious nature of her crime. In an illustration of insidious agency-denial, the focus was afforded to the underlying excuses behind her crime, as opposed to her actions themselves. Articles from the NY and LA Times, utilizing statements such as, "Andrea Yates was incapable of determining her actions were wrong... she was ... driven by delusions that they were going to hell and she must save them" as well as "a simple, unremarkable Christian woman. She wore neat spectacles and had streaming hair ... the Yates were an attractive family," all promulgated notions of helplessness and desperation, while also imparting Yates's crime an aura of impossibility (Stack 25; "Killings Put Dark Side of Mom’s Life in Light" 20). This was a sweet, submissive, God-fearing homemaker whose entire life revolved around her family. Her actions were a mysterious, once-in-a-lifetime tragedy, springing from utterly alien internal forces.

Yates' status as a mother – a role that is so often pedestalized and mythologized – was further spotlighted to render her somehow pristine: a murderer, yet morally inviolate because the filicide occurred while she was under extreme duress. Her defense attorney went so far as to state that, "jurors…should pity a woman who was so tormented by mental illness that she killed her children out of a sense of 'Mother knows best'" (Weatherby et al 7). Whether intentional or accidental, the discursive outcome allowed for the construction of an utterly 'mad' woman – paranoid, pitiful, but most importantly passive – thus decimating the challenges Yates might pose to our conceptions of both femininity and motherhood. In her paper Women Who Kill Their Children, Jayne Huckerby went so far as to state that Yates, as a white, middle-class suburban mother, served as a "poster girl" for the romanticized cult of motherhood. Her actions, albeit deviant, were seen as an isolated incident rather than symptomatic of any greater systemic ills. Moreover, affixing her with the 'mad' label – thus focusing solely on her medical malady – allowed her case to be elevated to a political cause. Interest groups such as NOW vehemently advocated against Yates' execution, citing her depression, schizophrenia and hallucinations as excuses. The phrase mental 'state' was used repeatedly during Yates' trial – with clear connotations of its temporal and disjunctive nature. Yates, judicial and media discourse seemed to imply, was not the killer. Her mental illness was. This combinatorial tactic of medicalization and politicization garnered Yates extraordinary support – and quite likely owed to the lenience of her sentence (140-170).

To be sure, Yates' postpartum illness was not a fictional spin – but a legitimate diagnosis that affects women in everyday life. A Brown University study cited about 200 cases of maternal filicide in the US per year, from the 1970s to the early 2000s. It also suggested that psychiatric or medical disorders that lead to a reduction in serotonin levels heighten the risk of filicide (Mariano 1-8). In the US, both antenatal to postnatal depression continue to be debated as mitigating circumstances for murder (Carmickle, L., et al. 579-576). However, in other countries, the close ties of birth and its attendant biological changes to mental illness have been legally acknowledged. Nations including Brazil, Germany, Italy, Japan, Turkey, New Zealand and the Philippines have some form of "infanticide laws," allowing for leniency in cases of postpartum-linked mental illness (Friedman et al. 139).

In Andrea Yates' case, it could be argued that her declining mental health did not arise in a vacuum. Indeed, the highlights of Yates' psychiatric history, even prior to her children's' murder, reveal a woman beset by proverbial psychological demons. In 1999, following the birth of her fourth son, Yates was already suffering from severe depression, and struggling with a feeling that "Satan wanted her to kill her children." That same year, she attempted suicide by overdosing on medication, reportedly in a misguided attempt to protect her family from herself. She was subsequently hospitalized for psychiatric care, only to be discharged and then make a second suicide attempt five weeks later. by cutting her throat She was eventually diagnosed with Major Depressive Episode with psychotic features. After few months' treatment via outpatient appointments, Yates dropped out on the claim that she was "feeling better." Also, despite the warnings from her treating psychiatrist about the recurrence of postpartum depression, she and her husband decided to have another child. Following the birth, Yates went on to be hospitalized thrice more for psychiatric treatment. Her last unsuccessful suicide attempt involved her filling the bathtub, with the vague explanation that, "I might need it" (Resnick 147-148).

Leading up to the mass-murder of her children, Yates continued to display psychotic symptoms, including the belief that the television commercials were casting aspersions on her parenting, that there were cameras monitoring her childcare, that a van on the street was surveilling her house – and finally, that Satan was "literally within her." Convinced that her bad mothering was to blame for her children's' poor development, she fixated on the biblical verse from Luke 17:2, "It would be better for him if a millstone were hung around his neck and he were thrown in the sea than that he should cause one of the little ones to stumble." Ultimately, on June 20, 2001, Yates would wait until her husband left for work, then proceed to drown her five children in the bathtub. When the police arrived, Yates stated that she expected to be arrested and executed – thereby allowing Satan to be killed along with her.  Of her children, she would say, "They had to die to be saved" (Resnick 150).

While Yates' actions shocked the collective public conscience, they also garnered an intense outpouring of sympathy. Partly, it was because, as Skip Hollandsworth remarked, "Yates came with no baggage." From her ordinary appearance to her uncheckered background, Yates had the makings of an All-American mother, who "read Bible stories to her five children... constructed Indian costumes for them from grocery sacks...[and]  gave them homemade valentines on Valentine’s Day with personalized coupons promising them free hugs and other treats" (1). Her daily routines were familiar, her struggles relatable. It was easy to cast her as a stand-in for other suburban mothers, with her decision to murder her children serving to darkly mirror their own worst fears. As Newsweek's Anna Quindlen noted, "Every mother I’ve asked about the Yates case has the same reaction. She’s appalled; she’s aghast. And then she gets this look. And the look says that at some forbidden level she understands" (1). Ultimately, Yates' status as a suburban housewife allowed her to occupy the pedestal of the Everywoman. The predominant narrative, as imbricated by the law and media, was that of someone unstable, delusional, overwhelmed – yet undeniably feminine. Through her, the more negative extremes of womanhood had been allowed unfortunate expression, a fact that served to render her less culpable rather than more (Phillips, et al 4).

In direct contrast, Aileen Wuornos' narrative was afforded little opportunity for feminization, much less humanization. Rather, her status as a prostitute and lesbian was immediately seized upon by the law and media – then highlighted with pejorative, condemnatory rhetoric. Capitalizing on the strong stigma attached to prostitution, in conjunction with Wuornos' gruff, belligerent, decidedly un-feminine manner, the dominant 'bad woman' narrative was invoked. Central to the trial and its accompanying media coverage was the sense of Wuornos' inherent 'unfitness' – on both a gendered and societal scale. Caroline Picart remarks that, "Wournos, even if given the title of being America’s first female serial killer, in comparison with heterosexual male serial killers, was not generally perceived as a skilled serial killer but, rather, as being a woman who did not know how to be a real woman" (3). In point of fact, Wuornos' designation as the 'first' female serial killer was an embellishment: there are other women who would have just as readily fit the mold of the serial killer. However, prior to Wuornos' arrest, women who killed were stereotypically shrouded behind a ladylike mystique, their modi operandi veering from arsenic and cool calculation, as with Anna Maria Zwanziger, to maternal instincts warped by insanity, as with Brenda Drayton, to Angels of Mercy whose nurturing demeanor hid a crueler edge, such as Beverley Allitt.

Wuornos, conversely, did not fit into any of the conventional molds of wife, widow, mother, nurse or daughter. If anything, she subverted the very conception of prostitutes as disposable victims, prowling along the same highways where numberless streetwalkers met their end. More to the point, her sexual preferences and choice of work marked her as a hostile threat to society – and more specifically to patriarchal stability. When interviewed by the TV show Dateline, she attempted to justify her killings by reminding audiences of the extreme dangers of prostitution. However, she failed to grasp that delving into the gory minutiae of such a socially-reviled profession did her defense no favors. In prostitutes, society too often finds convenient scapegoats. Shunned as breeders of contagion and social ills, they are reduced to receptacles for everything heteronormative family-life pretends to disavow. Yet their role as the integral underbelly of society also necessitates their invisibility – and, by extension, disposability – in order to preserve the immaculate image of the nuclear family. With that in mind, perhaps it is at once ironic and unsurprising that Dateline's co-anchor Jane Pauley states, "This is a story of unnatural violence. The roles are reversed. Most serial killers kill prostitutes" (Hart 142).

The media, of course, ruthlessly weaponized Wuornos' 'outsider' against her. Her checkered history was touted as proof of her immorality, with news coverage running the gamut from mean-spirited to sensationalist. The NY Times was quick to point out that "Ms. Wuornos served a year in prison in 1982-83 for armed robbery…she also faced charges of vehicle theft and grand larceny,"  "She was a prostitute part of the time," "residents can now rest easy," "Ms. Wuornos was ‘a killer who robs rather than a robber who kills" (Smothers 16). Meanwhile, the LA Times ran an interview with police officers stating that, "We believe she pretty much meets the guidelines of a serial killer" ("Transient Woman Accused in Florida Serial Killings" 40). Every aspect of Wuornos' life was vilified and picked apart, the better to construct the image of an unnatural creature. Even descriptions of her physical appearance underscored the extremes to which the media tried to demonize her. A 2002 article at the Palm Beach Post describes her as "a haggard-looking drinker and heavy smoker…her weathered face has a cold, dead stare that morphs into a wildeyed laugh" (Wells 5). By so assiduously focusing on Wuornos' negative traits, the media sought to render her as unrelatable, and ultimately undeserving of human sympathy. However, at the crux of her deviance was not the violent nature of her crimes, but how far she had strayed from the boundaries of traditional femininity. Wuornos – caricatured as a monster of sheer lunatic aggression, wanton sadism and unmitigated cruelty – was not a 'real' woman. As Jeffner Allen notes in her work, Lesbian Philosophy: Explorations, "Violence is defended as the right to limit life and take life that is exercised by men... A woman, by definition, is not violent, and if violent, a female is not a woman" (22-30). 

Similar to Andrea Yates, Wuornos grappled with mental illness. During her trial, both the defense and prosecution employed psychologists who testified that she suffered from Borderline Personality Disorder (BPD), in addition to symptoms of posttraumatic stress.  First used by analyst Adolph Stern in 1938, BPD describes patients who are at the border between neurotic and psychotic. Individuals with BPD may suffer from patterns of instability in mood, jobs, relationships and self-image. The diagnosis is applied predominantly to survivors of sexual abuse. (Giannangelo 19). In Aileen Wuornos' case, her experiences of sexual abuse from childhood to adulthood, her violent and unstable years as a transient, in addition to her ninth-grade education level and mental disabilities, were well-documented. However, the prosecution minimized these factors during the trial, insisting that they were not "substantial" and in no way impaired Wuornos' capacity as an instigator of violence. As the district attorney claimed in his closing statement, "Aileen Wuornos at the time of the killing knew right from wrong."

This focus on individual action is by itself hardly noteworthy, if not for the courts' further descriptions of Wuornos as "primitive" and "damaged" – a subhuman designation at odds with the portrait of the controlled and calculating serial killer (Sarat 75-77). In Wuornos, the courts attempted to reconcile two seemingly-contradictory, yet equivalent extremes of 'badness' – the Lombrosian archetype of the atavistic female, a primal degenerate driven by a cruel thirst for sex and bloodshed, and the paradoxical essence of 'evil' as it applies to the feminine shadow, with an ice-tipped propensity for malice and manipulation. Yet, where the male killer wears both these discrepant masks of wildness and wit with a dynamic ease, embodying within himself a transcendental self-mastery beyond moral codes, homicidal females such as Wuornos find their narratives consistently entrenched in gendered morality.  Even when afforded agency for their own crimes, their humanity (three-dimensional, flawed, self-directed) is downplayed in favor of a wholesale monstrosity. Their true crime is not taking a human life. Rather, it is straying, with eyes wide open, beyond the province of womanhood. As Ashley Wells remarks,

What’s fascinating about Aileen is how little her own mental illness played into her trial and the media hoopla surrounding it... There was no narrative in place for female serial killers the way there was for male ones. So instead of focusing on her mental illness or her horrific childhood, the way we might for a male serial killer now that we have so many to choose from, the media latched onto the fact that Wuornos was a prostitute and a lesbian, some sort of unholy alliance of the two types of women it only knew how to deal with in the broadest possible stereotypes (1).

It goes without saying that criminologists have embraced a broad spectrum of theoretical perspectives, from sociological, philosophical and psychoanalytic, the better to explicate the disturbing relationship between law/media and homicidal women. Predominant among them is Labeling Theory, which can be traced back to Frank Tannenbaum's 1938 work Crime and the Community. Chiefly focused on self-identity, Labeling Theory purports that deviant behavior – both singular and recurrent – is predicated on external categorizations, i.e. the self-fulfilling prophecy of stereotypes. Social categorizations function in pernicious ways, wherein people will subconsciously or deliberately begin altering their behavior to conform to the labels they are placed within.

In the case of Andrea Yates, Labeling Theory asserted itself on multiple levels. First, it was present in the defense constructed by Yates' lawyers, who cleaved tenaciously to the idea that she was a loving mother whose crime – while terrible – was episodic, and fueled by depression. The media too, seized this narrative and ran with it: the poignant image of Yates as a mother who had, quite literally, loved her children to death. Lastly, the insidious strength of labeling manifested itself through the personality of Yates herself. Her terror of failing to conform to the image of a perfect mother, by damning her children to Hell, led her to a shocking act of filicide. Rosenblatt and Greenland note, “it is the very attempt to fulfill her culturally defined role as wife and mother in our society which is often at the source of much of her violence” (180). Certainly, everything about Yates corresponded with the cultural view of women as emotional, flighty and easily led astray. Even her classification as 'mad' came to be viewed with the more sympathetic connotations of the word. Ultimately, it was that exculpatory label that framed the way Yates was perceived – by the courts and public alike (Weatherby et al 3).

Skip Hollandsworth, as previously noted, drove home Yates' appeal as the Everywoman, due to her lack of "baggage" (1). Ironically, the coverage of Yates' case was laden with it. The LA Times, for instance, noted that in the first four weeks of Yates' trial, "more than 1, 150 articles" were devoted to dissecting her morality versus her mental health (Gamiz 3). Early public opinion was sharply polarized, with some comparing her to the vindictive modern-day Medea of Greek mythology, while others condemned, not Yates herself, but her husband, her psychiatrist, her neighbors, and even the societal constructions of motherhood at large for allowing the rigors of childcare to overshadow Yates' clinical emergency. Ultimately, both arguments allotted focus, not to Yates' crime, but to how inextricably it was fused to both sympathetic and censorious conceptions of motherhood. During the early parts of the trial, for instance, the prosecution clung to the scheming Medea narrative, claiming that she had deliberately faked her postpartum issues, in order to coerce her husband into buying her a house (the family lived in a schoolbus before moving to a house in Clear Lake, Houston.) Meanwhile, the defense, and the mainstream media, veered toward the Madonna archetype, wherein Yates' mental collapse sprang from trying to attain the impossible ideal of the perfect mother. In either case, the disparate opinions were not an ideological 'split' so much as two sides of the same coin: the saturation of gender in "neutral categories of criminality and intent" (Hyman 193-208).

Unsurprisingly, while Labeling Theory offers an opportunity to examine its impacts on female filicidal perpetrators within criminological discourse, male perpetrators receive very different socio-legal epithets. As the Yates case makes apparent, both law and media doggedly adhere to the exaltation of certain social characteristics, (white, female, attractive, middle-class). In order to exculpate the offender, most, if not all, these boxes must be checked. Filicidal men, however, cannot readily satisfy this criterion. Cases similar to Yates', such as that of Adair Garcia in 2002, highlight the lopsided nature of both media coverage and legal sentencing. Like Yates, Garcia was suffering from mental illness, and mistakenly gripped by the delusion that by killing himself and his children, they would be "going to be a better place, a painless place." After putting his six children to bed, he disconnected the smoke detector and phone at his home, then lit the charcoal in the barbecue grill, and placed it in the hallway. By the next morning, five of his children had died, although Garcia and his eldest daughter, who was nine at the time, survived. Despite the defense's arguments that Garcia had sunk into a deep depression after his wife left him, and was "unable to think straight," he was found guilty of the five counts of first-degree murder and one of attempted murder, then sentenced to life without parole (Wang 1).

Despite the similarities in both Yates' and Garcia's cases, there was a striking divergence in the media coverage. Compared to the widespread scrutiny garnered by the Yates' family, a paltry 77 articles were devoted to the Garcia case (Gamiz 3). This fact that did not go unnoticed by The Globe and the Mail's Doug Saunders. "The distinction," he wrote, "lies deep in human psychology. When fathers kill their offspring, it is viewed as a serious crime; when mothers do it, it is seen as a deep sickness, one that garners both sympathy and profound horror" (1). Subsequent disparities would also be observed in the tone of media articles, with Garcia pegged as "twisted" and seeking "revenge" on his spouse, whereas Yates would categorically be described as a "Houston mother," with news articles posing headlines such as "What drives a mom to kill?" and "Andrea Yates 'still grieves for her children'" (Adams 1; Landau 1; "Twisted Dad…" 1). The contrasting narratives are a grim reminder that violence, even from filicidal fathers, is perceived as biological hardwiring, and somehow emblematic of men as a gender. As Hollandsworth remarks, "Men who go mad do not interest us. But women who go mad are haunting" (1).

Ultimately, it was this feminized conflation of madness with victimhood that diffused Yates' responsibility as a murderer. By clinging to labels that separated her from her crime, and yet sought to "preserve [her] femininity, fidelity and commitment to motherhood," her agency as an individual with complexity and self-determination was utterly disregarded (Hyman 208). Nancy Taylor Porter, in her book, Violent Women in Contemporary Theatres: Staging Resistance, describes Yates as a "cipher" (297). In both literature and cinema, "ciphers" are characters who bear similarities to the writer – "attitudes, traumas, even life events" (Boyd 1). However, in Yates' case, her cipher status rendered her not polysemantic, but faceless. Beyond simply a woman who "lost herself," she was someone who appeared to have never been found: she seemingly had no personal desires to dissect or decode. ("She was always trying to be such a good girl," her mother would remark in a Newsweek interview. "Always thinking of other people, never of herself.”) In Yates, both the courts and media constructed a figure that was less a person than personae. She was an empty vessel waiting to be filled with the most socially-appropriate label, and made significant through said label (Hollandsworth 1). 

Ironically, this same vein of reductionism in the media's stance led to Aileen Wuornos' widespread condemnation, and later execution. While Labeling Theory is certainly influential in examining the coverage and outcome of her trial, more fitting still is the theory of Double Deviance, developed by a number of contemporary feminist criminologists. (Heidensohn 102; Chesney-Lind 115; Berrington & Honkatukia 50-72). According to Double Deviance theory, women who commit crimes are punished twice as harshly – owing to the fact that they have transgressed not only criminal law but procreative norms. Certainly, this element of condemnation can be observed in Wuornos' journalistic treatment. Whereas Andrea Yates was afforded the protective barrier of respectability (a former nurse, a mother, a suburban housewife), Wuornos, as a prostitute and a lesbian, was regarded as depraved in mind, body and moral fiber. Hers were crimes not just against her victims – but against her gender itself. The harsh – almost dyslogistic – language used by media both addresses and feeds her status as a pariah. Certainly, one might argue that 'first female serial killer' would not be such a shocking designation if women weren't so intrinsically linked to passivity. For a taboo to be broken, it is essential to recognize the unwritten rules that preside over our existence; the intangible myths that are enforced as reality through tradition and repetition. Similarly, femininity, softness, or mercy would not be sacrosanct for society if they were not also concepts that were fragile and vulnerable to violation. With that in mind, a woman transgressing laws, either man-made and 'natural', is perceived as openly more agentic – therefore deviant – than the woman who simply disavows those same boundaries.

It comes as no surprise, then, that Wuornos received such widespread censure. Granted, the nature of her crimes was brutal. But that very brutality – so masculinized and deliberate – was what shocked the public and jurors alike. Not only were a majority of her victims found stripped naked and riddled in close-range gunshot wounds, but Wuornos also divested them of their wallets and other valuable possessions, in addition to stealing their cars. How could the public reconcile these predatory actions with a woman – the so-called weaker sex – unless she was somehow quintessentially evil? When Wuornos' profession, sexual orientation, and poverty were brought to light, it seemed only to exacerbate her guilt. This wasn't a 'normal' woman – the scope of normality here being limited to the white, heterosexual, middle-class population – but an anomaly. 

An article from the Washington Post illustrates the tenuous position that Wuornos – brash, foul-mouthed, stridently unrepentant – occupied in society: "Women do this kind of thing? Poison, yes, and the occasional queenly beheading, but can women be serial murderers like Jeffrey Dahmer or Ted Bundy? Spiderwoman! Avenging angel!" (Allen 1) Although the appellations bear a tinge of humor, they also serve to emphasize the essential absurdity of a homicidal woman. Such an individual becomes an incongruous breach within the fabric of our dominant cultural framework. More to the point, she is a blot on the pristine mythology of the perfect woman. This is precisely what makes the heinousness of her offense so blatant, and her stigmatization that much harsher (Phillips, et al 10).

To be sure, Wuornos was not alone in being pathologized and pigeonholed as a grotesque aberration of womanhood. Similar judicial and media language was used in the case of Myra Hindley, an English serial killer who, alongside her partner, Ian Brady, raped and killed five children between 1963 and 1965. Although both were eventually apprehended, tried, and found guilty, he of three counts of murder and she of two, the subsequent media attention surrounding the couple was noteworthy for the gendered lens of exceptionality versus abnormality that came into play. Although equally agentic in terms of planning and implementing the sexual assaults, Hindley would be dubbed "The Most Evil Woman in Britain," an incendiary label that far exceeded, and outlasted, the public's condemnation of her male counterpart, Brady (Cummins 115).  Further legal and press discourse would reduce the pair to a heteronormative microcosm of gender roles, with Brady serving as the cunning mastermind, while Hindley served as the obedient helpmate. However, this stereotypical slant, far from minimizing her responsibility as a killer, horrified the public, precisely because Hindley was a member of the supposed fairer sex. In an article for the Independent, Geraldine Bedell wrote: "Higher standards are expected of women when it comes to the care of children: Myra betrayed her sex and exploited her sex so that children could be sexually assaulted, tortured and killed" (1).

Similar disparities would arise during the trial, with Brady's attitude toward children being only cursorily examined, while Hindley was lengthily and harshly grilled for her absence of maternal instinct toward her victims, ("The screams of a little girl of ten… Did you put your hands over your ears…?... Or get the child out of the room and see that she was treated as a woman should treat a female child, or any other child…?") Comparable to Wuornos, the crux of the issue was less that Hindley had failed by the moral standards of society, but by the social constructions of femininity. Also like Wuornos, everything from her appearance (“the Medusa face of Hindley, under the melon puff-ball of hair") to her sexuality ("longstanding and passionate affairs with other prisoners… she had them all eating out of her hand") were fair game for vilification. Her face would be emblazoned across newspapers and magazines as an icon of evil, comparable to the "image of Medusa" (Birch 32), and similarly mythologized as a one-dimensional symbol of monstrousness (Birch 51; Goodman 159-224; Jones 163; Stanley n.p). In contrast, her partner-in-crime, Brady, would slip through the cracks of collective societal memory, meeting the prosaic fate of living and dying in prison. Helena Kennedy, who once represented Hindley, notes,

We feel differently about a woman doing something consciously cruel because of our expectations of women as the nurturing sex. The adage is that women who commit crime are mad, bad or sad. The bad may be few in number, but once given the label there is no forgiving. It defies explanation that someone, especially a woman, stood by and allowed torture to take place, but it is important to remember that women did it in the concentration camps, and evidence is emerging that women are doing it in Syria and Iraq with Islamic State. Terror is a man, but wickedness is a woman (1).

Jaques Derrida, citing Montaigne, has famously stated, "There is more ado to interpret interpretations than to interpret things" (278).  This certainly applies to the mandate of womanhood in legal discourse, and the pernicious effects it exerts on sentencing outcomes. Jaques Lacan, one of the most influential psychoanalysts of the twentieth century, has gone further by emphasizing the role of language in social and gendered regulation. That the proliferation of stereotypes has been absorbed into the fabric of language goes without saying. But more intriguing is Lacan's theory that the very bedrock of linguistics is the system of binary opposites: male/female, good/evil, self/other (Bertens 44). This proves problematic when the subject of homicidal women arises. Aggression is, by and large, considered an essential component of masculinity. Therefore murders committed by men, across the varied spectrum of violence, are easily equated with maleness. More perverse still – as the celebrity status of Ted Bundy or Charles Manson testifies – they are often lauded as exceptionalities, a type of Nietzschean superman beyond mundane moral codes (Waller 7). Conversely, female killers disrupt the very workings of cultural codes, due to their incompatibility with gender roles. Their discursive constructions by law and media are therefore intended to either squeeze them into a narrow, comprehensibly feminine niche (the 'mad' woman) – or to viciously excise them from the social script (the 'bad' woman). As Helen Birch remarks in her work, Moving Targets: Women, Murder and Representation, "... we do not have a language to represent female killing, and [cases like these disrupt] the very terms which hold gender in place (61)."

The solution, then, as Derrida puts it, might be to deconstruct the overriding 'mad/bad' narratives as they apply to homicidal females. Only through unraveling these binary systems is it possible to expose the interstitial spaces where these women exist as multifaceted beings with depth, nuance and agency. There is, by and large, no static or singular explanation for why women kill. Their motives and methods are an evolving, organic bricolage that is shaped by family, education, economics, religion and a host of other institutional configurations (Yardley et al 1-26). By superficializing each individual case study – thus treating the women's proclivities as either anomalies or generalities – we are in fact sacrificing knowledge at both the macro and micro level. What is essential, instead, is to look beyond social paradigms, and comprehend that guilt/innocence is in truth merely an effect of how it is interpreted, framed, and eventually typified in order to perpetuate and protect dominant mythologies. True, breaking free from the security of labels might place us in the disquieting position of owning our own ambiguous natures. However, it may also challenge us to examine women as hyper-specific (individual) and sometimes self-contradictory beings – and to further apply that ambiguity to homicidal women. To successfully do so is to confront aspects of human nature – and criminogenic behavior – that would otherwise be invisible beneath the shadow of institutionally-generated abstractions.  Dichotomizing female killers as 'Victim' or 'Monster,' on the other hand, serves only to perpetuate harmful gender stereotypes, reducing such women to grotesque spectacles of 'Otherness' based on their deviance from the discursive framework of femininity.

Works Cited

Adams, Char. “Mom Still 'Grieves for Her Children' 15 Years After Drowning Them” People Magazine, 1 Sept 2016, pp. 1, https://people.com/crime/andrea-yates-now-she-grieves-for-her-children-15-years-after-drownings/.

Allen, Henry. “Essay Section.” The Washington Post, Feb 12, 1992, p. c.01

Allen, Jeffner. Lesbian Philosophy: Explorations. Institute of Lesbian Studies, 1986.

Taylor, Boyd. "On Writing #9: On Cipher Characters, Why They Can Be Flat, and How to Fix Them." 5 Oct 2010. sboydtaylor.com/2010/10/05/a-new-on-writing-one-of-my-best-o/

Bednell, Geraldine. "Profile: Beyond Forgiveness?: Myra Hindley." Independent Digital News and Media, 23 Oct. 2011, pp. 1, https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/profile-beyond-forgiveness-myra-hindley-geraldine-bedell-on-the-child-murderer-with-an-enduring-1456064.html.

Berrington, Eileen, and Päivi Honkatukia. “An Evil Monster and a Poor Thing: Female Violence in the Media.” Journal of Scandinavian Studies in Criminology and Crime Prevention, vol. 3, no. 1, 2002, pp. 50–72.

Bertens, Johannes Willem., and Joseph P. Natoli. Postmodernism: the Key Figures. Blackwell Publishers, 2002.

Birch, Helen. Moving Targets: Women, Murder, and Representation. University of California Press, 1994, pp. 51.

Carmickle, L., et al. “Postpartum Illness and Sentencing: Why the Insanity Defense Is Not Enough for Mothers with Postpartum Depression, Anxiety, and Psychosis.” Journal of Legal Medicine, vol. 37, February 23 2018, pp. 579-576.

Cranford, Victoria et al. “Hearth and Home: Images of Women in the Mass Media.” Social Forces, vol. 57, no. 4, 1979, pp. 1426.

Chesney-Lind, M. Media Misogyny: Demonizing ‘Violent’ Girls and Women. Walter De Gruyter Inc, 1999.

Cohen, Anne. “Netflix’s Extremely Wicked, Shockingly Evil & Vile Has Too Much Sexy Ted Bundy.” Refinery, 1 May, pp. 1. 2019, https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2019/05/231467/extremely-wicked-shockingly-evil-vile-review-ted-bundy-netflix-movie.

Comack, Elizabeth, and Salena Brickey. “Constituting the Violence of Criminalized Women.” Canadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice, vol. 49, no. 1, 2007, pp. 1–36., doi:10.3138/5523-4873-1386-5453.

Cummins, Ian, et al. Serial Killers and the Media: the Moors Murders Legacy. Palgrave Macmillan, 2019.

D'orban, P. T. “Women Who Kill Their Children.” The British Journal of Psychiatry, vol. 134, no. 6, January 1979, pp. 560–571.

Davies, Jude, and Carol R. Smith. Gender, Ethnicity and Sexuality in Contemporary American Film. Keele University Press, 1997.

Derrida, J. Writing and Difference. Translated by A. Bass. Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1978.

"Doctor Says Mother was 'Driven by Delusions.' " New York Times, 7 March 2002, Late Edition, East Coast, p. A.25

Downing, Lisa. The Subject of Murder: Gender, Exceptionality, and the Modern Killer. University of Chicago Press, 2003.

Federal Bureau of Investigation, "Ten-Year Arrest Trends by Sex, 2003–2012," UCR, 2012.

Fol, Isabelle. Dominance of the Male Gaze in Hollywood Films. Grin Verlag, 2006.

Friedman, Susan Hatters, et al. “Child Murder by Mothers: Patterns and Prevention.” World Psychiatry, vol. 6, no. 3, October 2005, pp. 137-141.

Gamiz, Manuel. “2 Tragic Cases Show Marked Contrasts.” Los Angeles Times, 15 Apr. 2002, pp. 1–3.

Giannangelo, Stephen J. Real-Life Monsters: a Psychological Examination of the Serial Murderer. Praeger, 2012, pp. 18-19.

Gilbert, P. R. “Discourses of Female Violence and Societal Gender Stereotypes.” Violence Against Women, vol. 8, no. 11, January 2002, pp. 1271–1300.

Goodman, Jonathan. The Moors Murders: the Trial of Myra Hindley and Ian Brady. Magpie, 1994, pp. 159-224.

Hart, Lynda. Fatal Women: Lesbian Sexuality and the Mark of Aggression. Princeton University Press, 1994.

Harrison, Marissa A., et al. “Sex Differences in Serial Killers.” Evolutionary Behavioral Sciences, vol. 13, no. 4, 2019, pp. 295–310., doi:10.1037/ebs0000157.

Heidensohn, Frances. Crime and Society. New York University Press, 1989.

Huckerby, Jayne. “Women Who Kill Their Children: Case Study and Conclusions Concerning the Differences in the Fall from Maternal Grace by Khoua Her and Andrea Yates.” Duke Journal of Gender Law & Policy, vol. 10, no. 1, 2003, pp. 149-172.

Hyman, Rebecca. “Medea of Suburbia: Andrea Yates, Maternal Infanticide, and the Insanity Defense.” Women's Studies Quarterly, vol. 32, no. 3, 2004, pp. 192–210.

Jackson, Bernard S. “‘Anchored Narratives and the Interface of Law, Psychology and Semiotics.” Legal and Criminological Psychology, vol. 1, no. 1, 1996, pp. 17–45., doi:10.1111/j.2044-8333.1996.tb00305.x.

Jewkes, Yvonne. “Media Representations of the Causes of Crime.” Criminal Justice Matters, vol. 55, no. 1, 2004, pp. 43–60.

Jones, Janie, and Carol Clerk. The Devil and Miss Jones: the Twisted Mind of Myra Hindley. Smith Gryphon, 1993, pp. 163.

Kellermann, Arthur L., and James A. Mercy. “Men, Women, And Murder.” The Journal of Trauma: Injury, Infection, and Critical Care, vol. 33, no. 1, 1992, pp. 1–5.

Kennedy, Helena. “The Myth of the She-Devil: Why We Judge Female Criminals More Harshly.” The Guardian News and Media, 2 Oct. 2018, pp. 1. https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/oct/02/the-myth-of-the-she-devil-why-we-judge-female-criminals-more-harshly.

Kirby, Mark, and Tanya Hope. Sociology in Perspective for OCR. Heinemann, 2000.

Lawson, Richard. “Zac Efron Is Unnervingly Good as Serial Killer Ted Bundy-But to What End?” Vanity Fair, Vanity Fair, 1 Feb. 2019, pp.1, https://www.vanityfair.com/hollywood/2019/01/zac-efron-ted-bundy-movie-review-extremely-wicked-shockingly-evil-and-vile.

Lombroso, Cesare, et al. Criminal Woman, the Prostitute, and the Normal Woman. Duke University Press, 2004.

Lombroso, Gina, and Cesare Lombroso. Criminal Man: According to the Classification of Cesare Lombroso. Filiquarian Publishing, 2011.

Mariano, Timothy Y., et al. “Toward a More Holistic Understanding of Filicide: A Multidisciplinary Analysis of 32 Years of U.S. Arrest Data.” Forensic Science International, vol. 236, 2014, pp. 46–53., doi:10.1016/j.forsciint.2013.12.019.

Meyers, Marian. Women in Popular Culture: Representation and Meaning. Hampton Press, 2008.

Millard, Anna. “Zac Efron's New Ted Bundy Movie May Be Taking Our Obsession With Serial Killers Too Far.” Zac Efron's New Ted Bundy Movie Might Be Too Sexy, Refinery, 27 Jan, pp. 1. 2019, https://www.refinery29.com/en-us/2019/01/222717/zac-efron-ted-bundy-extremely-wicked-critics-react.

Nalepa, Laurie, and Richard Pfefferman. The Murder Mystique: Female Killers and Popular Culture. Praeger, 2013.

Phillips, Dretha M., Lois DeFleur Nelson, and Gregory B. Walters. “The Female Offender and Public Opinion: Perceived Seriousness of Crimes and Recommended Dispositions.” National Institute of Justice, 1976, pp. 4-10.

Picart, CJ. “Crime and the Gothic: Sexualizing Serial Killers,” Journal of Criminal Justice and Popular Culture, vol. 14, no. 3, 2006, pp. 3.

Porter, Nancy Taylor. Violent Women in Contemporary Theatres: Staging Resistance. PALGRAVE MACMILLAN, 2019, pp. 297.

Quindlen, Anna. “Playing God On No Sleep.” Newsweek, Newsweek, 14 Mar. 2010, pp. 1. https://www.newsweek.com/playing-god-no-sleep-154643.

Rafter, Nicole Hahn, and Elizabeth Anne Stanko. Judge, Lawyer, Victim, Thief: Women, Gender Roles, and Criminal Justice. Northeastern University Press, 1982.

Resnick, Phillip J. “The Andrea Yates Case: Insanity on Trial.” Cleveland State Law Review, vol. 55, no. 147, 2007, pp. 147–156.

Rosenblatt, E. and C. Greenland. “Female Crimes of Violence.” Canadian Journal of Criminology & Corrections, vol. 16, no. 2, April 1974, pp. 173-180.

Roy, Jody M. Love to Hate: America's Obsession with Hatred and Violence. Columbia University Press, 2002.

Sarat, Austin et al. Performances of Violence. UMass, 2011, pp. 75-77.

Saunders, Doug. “Mom Kills, Dad Kills: Two Takes on Tragedy.” The Globe and Mail, 2 March. 2002, https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/mom-kills-dad-kills-two-takes-on-tragedy/article22395397/.

 “Serial Murder: Multi-Disciplinary Perspectives for Investigators.” National Center for the Analysis of Violent Crime, pp. 1–71. FBI.

Smith, Tara. Judicial Review in an Objective Legal System. Cambridge University Press, 2015.

Smothers, Ronald. "Woman Arrested in a Series of Killings in Florida." New York Times, Late Edition. East Coast, January 18, 1991, p. A.16

Stack, Mega K. "Killings Put Dark Side of Mom’s Life in Light: Until her children were drowned in a tub June 20, most knew Andrea Yates as a quiet, doting Christian woman." Los Angeles Times, July 8, 2001, pp. 20.

Stanley, Liz. Documents of Life Revisited: Narrative and Biographical Methodology for a 21st Century Critical Humanism. Routledge, 2016, n.p.

"Transient Woman Accused in Florida Serial Killings." Los Angeles Times, Home Edition, January 18, 1991, p. 40.

Tuchman, Gaye et al. Hearth and Home: Images of Women in the Mass Media. Oxford University Press, 1978.

“Twisted Dad Killed His Kids after Making Them Record a 'Goodbye' Video for Their Mum.” Life Death Prizes, 28 July 2017, https://www.lifedeathprizes.com/real-life-crime/adair-garcia-killed-his-children-70845.

Vronsky, Peter. Female Serial Killers: How and Why Women Become Monsters. Berkley Books, 2007.

Waller, S. Serial Killers - Philosophy for Everyone: Being and Killing. Wiley-Blackwell, 2010.

Wang, Andrew. “Father Guilty of Killing 5 of His Children.” Los Angeles Times, 30 Mar. 2005, pp. 1, https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-2005-mar-30-me-grill30-story.html.

Weatherby, Georgie Ann. "The Value of Life: Female Killers & the Feminine Mystique." Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice Education, vol. 2, no. 1, 2008, pp. 1-20. 

Weber, Cynthia. International Relations Theory: a Critical Introduction. Routledge, 2001.

Wells, Ashley. “Revisiting Aileen Wuornos in Light of #MeToo.” Medium, 11 May 2018, pp. 1

Wells, Libby. “Woman Who Killed 6 Men Faces Death Herself Today.” The Palm Beach Post, October 9, 2002, p. 5.

“Where Is Andrea Yates Now? A Peek inside Her Life in a State Mental Hospital.” ABC13 Houston, 20 June 2018, https://abc13.com/where-is-andrea-yates-now-peek-inside-her-secluded-life/1980992/.

Williams, NBC’s Pete, and News Services. “Convictions Overturned for Mom Who Drowned 5 Kids.” NBCNews.com, NBCUniversal News Group, 7 Jan. 2005, http://www.nbcnews.com/id/6794098/ns/us_news-crime_and_courts/t/convictions-overturned-mom-who-drowned-kids/#.XdyUfchKjIU.

Yardley, Elizabeth, and David Wilson. Criminological Institutionalism and the Case of Mary Ann Cotton: Female Serial Killers In Social Context. Policy Press, 2015.