POST #9 – Posted on Aug 15 2019 – click here
or pdf file: Jocelyn Chanussot_IEEE_dangerous psychopath_full_text

SYNOPSIS – click here
or pdf file: Jocelyn Chanussot_IEEE_dangerous psychopath_synopsis




Nov 06, 2022


This column is not about me; it is about you, young Americans.

So, I will NOT talk about how the African Graduate Coordinator decided:

  • not to cover tuition for any of my potential, in-good-standing, graduate geospatial students for third year in a row while claiming that the university did not have money to support them. This “No students for me” sounds much like “No soup for you”! If it is not funny, it would be very sad (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RqlQYBcsq54).

NEITHER will I talk about how the African Graduate Coordinator decided:

Rather, I WANT to talk about the concept of ‘African’ vs. ‘African American’ students at the university based on my observations, conversations and correspondence with graduate students.

For the past three years there is a large inflow of African students admitted under various (strange) circumstances to the geospatial and geology graduate programs at our university. I am talking about the same geospatial program for which the university “did not have money”, how the African Graduate Coordinator openly claimed on several occasions.

These students, including those who are initially rejected for their low GPA, suddenly show up in the university and they all suddenly become enrolled in the graduate programs. Most of these students do not satisfy the university program requirements, come with no money to pay for their tuition, and share living space with other students that arrived before them. At first, their tuition is deferred for a semester or two until the African Graduate Coordinator and the university somehow clear their tuition accounts. Then, they suddenly become regular students, complete their degrees with the least possible number of thesis committee members, enter the job market, and finally realize their long-term dream of staying in the US. The fact that there is no mechanism at the university to confirm those students’ degrees, their marks, or validity of their reference letters is irrelevant, as the students are simply invited by the African Graduate Coordinator. While some of these students are competent to study at the graduate level and can fit easily, some of them lack the basic university-, and even high school-level knowledge. Many of them do not understand and ignore the concept of plagiarism.

The whole situation is a big challenge for: 1) those African students as they are not prepared to assimilate in a new educational system and American living conditions; perhaps, what they are promised and what they expect in the US is not what awaits them; 2) professors, as they have to change their way of teaching, simplify things,  and lower their expectations; 3) national students, as their knowledge does not advance while listening trivial concepts that they may already know; 3) professors again, as they receive low teaching evaluations from both students with inadequate understanding and national students who are not advancing; 4) university, IF the university truly cares about its reputation and not about the optical illusion of the system; 5) the country, as the job market becomes saturated, and the whole education system degrades.

To reiterate, by lowering educational expectations for those African students, or any other students for a matter of fact, is in a direct contradiction to the Common Core Standards of raising expectations for students (CAP, Release, 2014). One should note that professors commonly lower their teaching standards for at least two job-loss related reasons: 1) students’ evaluations of a professor become deeply flawed if the students are given low marks or reported for plagiarism; 2) professors can be easily blamed for racism if they complain about students of color and thus, they commonly stay silent….and the vicious circle continues. This is amplified at our university as the African Graduate Coordinator is backed-up and supported by the university elite including the Dean, the Provost, the President, Human Resources (HR), and others. I reported the case to HR 8-10 months ago but there is no answer. Then recently, I decided to break the awkward silence among the faculty members, as I did not want to be one of the ‘sheep in sheep’s clothing” (how W. Churchill would say), and to teach students with questionable educational background while, at the same time, my potential, in-good-standing admitted graduate students were not financially supported. But then, I was immediately shushed and gaslighted by several colleagues (column: ‘Gaslighting in academia’). And I shushed, indeed.

And then one day, a couple of weeks ago, during a meeting, the African American Provost said: “…and we should keep increasing the number of admitted African American students. I am not saying”, he continued to compensate and have a politically correct comment, “that we should not admit others, but African Americans should be the priority”.

That comment was the missing link in my pattern recognition of the ‘black optical illusion’ in our university education system.

“Admitting African or African American students?” – I almost asked the Provost but then I decided to shush one more time. Indeed, there is no difference for an outsider’s general perception, or the government’s perception, or the university donors’ perception, you pick. I doubt that whoever is pushing for this agenda is investing enough effort in educating African Americans.  While about 80% of my class students last year were students from Africa, I cannot recall that I have seen any African American student in our program in several years.

For me there is no difference who I teach; Indeed, I always wanted to go to Africa to educate African children. Now, Africa came to me, and I do support those students. However, my understanding while teaching in the US has been to involve and retain African American students as much as possible, to attract them to our undergraduate and graduate programs. Recently, I have even received a government grant to attract and retain African Americans, among other American students of color, to the university programs ….and NOW, being a non-native American myself, I am completely confused!

May 30, 2021


“At this university, ‘the worst thing’ is to be a big white man” – a colleague said.
“ …and a big white Christian woman” – I added.

Today, I want to write about some other challenges that I face at Bowling Green State University (BGSU). The issues are related to ‘culture clashes’ between academics who immigrated from different countries. Increasing the diversity of faculty in academia is one of important goals of any ‘successful’ university, but some questions remain open, such as: Can Western academia do more to help male immigrant professors to integrate in the academic environment, to synchronize the diversity? Is a male professor, who comes to the US/Canada/Europe from a country where women are treated differently, capable of reaching the expected level of respect for female professors?

The graduate coordinator and I interacted on several occasions:

(1) when he approached me and said: “You know, I saw those complaints about BGSU you sent around; you should stop doing that; stop talking or you will lose your job; You are an immigrant, and you know that you cannot win; I am telling you from my experience, you have to be quiet, that’s the only way you can keep your job…”

  • “I know, you are so right, omg, I will stop talking” – I said and thought: “Hmm, he questions my judgement, maturity and freedom to make my own decisions.

(2) when he suddenly entered my office and said: “You should step down from the merit committee now when you are applying for tenure; people may think that you want to punish those who will not vote for you …”

  • “You are right, I will contact the director immediately, thank you for the advice” – I said and thought: “Hmm, he questions my honesty and my rights.”

(3) when he stated in front of faculty members that my professional field of remote sensing was not science, but just a tool – all within the context of my field being excluded from the graduate programs.

  • ” Hmm, he is belittling my professional background of 10 years from the University of Toronto, HE, who had only two graduate students in 15 years, and HE, who did not report any other education but PhD on his professional website. He would never say this to a male colleague, or to any American colleague. Is he buying friendship with hopes that American colleagues will like him by being mean to me, a white European female?”– I thought. However, I stayed polite and did not say much, as usual.

(4) when he wrote that from now on, he would be deciding about the graduate programs, and that I might not always agree with him from now on. “And btw”, he said, “I understand remote sensing, I used it a couple of times.”

  • “Hmm”, then I checked his website and was shocked with a variety of his “Specialty Areas of Interest”, which sounded to me more like hobbies, or better like my cooking skills, a bit of everything. Then I looked at a poster of his graduate student posted on the wall across my office and it was very similar to the one I did when I was the 8th grade (see poster), and I smiled.

(5) when he replaced my teaching assistant the very last moment before my course started without any consultation with me; I was given a student with no background and understanding needed to be my TA.

  • “Hmm, no-respect once again; he is doing a favor to an American male professor while damaging my status” – I thought.

(6) …and then … when all I wanted to know was why I was not assigned a single graduate student during the recruitment processes in the last two years, NOT in just ONE BUT in TWO graduate programs, when more than 10 students applied and wanted me to be their mentor.

First I sent a gentle letter to him, then second letter to him, then third letter to him and the director, then a letter to the Dean, then second letter to the Dean, then I checked with other universities and I was told: “They are hiding something if they are not transparent” …..and then….

Then I wrote a letter to the Provost:

“”””Hello Dr. Whitehead,

I am writing to ask for your help to obtain answers from the graduate coordinator to the following questions:  

  • I want to know why some of my potential graduate students were rejected during the graduate student recruitment process without me being informed and consulted. (I learned about the outcomes when the students contacted me back, complaining and asking me for explanations).
  • I want to know why some of my accepted-with-no-assistantship graduate students were not on the list provided to me in the selection process. (Yet, none of them were offered any assistantship meaning they could not join the program).
  • I want to know why NONE of my potential graduate students was granted an assistantship during the recruitment process two years in a row. (Without students, I cannot professionally advance; I had 6-8 good students who wanted to work under my supervision this year to select from).
  • I ask for the list of the faculty members who received assistantships for their students during this-year and last-year recruitment cycles, to make sure that the BSGU’s diversity policies are in place. (Although the content of this letter already suggests exclusion rather than inclusion and belongness, as proposed by BGSU).

 The graduate coordinator rejected to provide me with the answers unless you or Dr. Dale Klopfer asked him to do so. Dr. Dale Klopfer said that he ‘hoped’ to review the recruitment policies by the next recruitment cycle next year, avoiding answering.  The school director was included in the conversation but ignored the situation, as he was the one who selected the graduate coordinator for the position although he was not experienced in working with graduate students.

I worked hard to attract the graduate students, who were all students of color, and I was hoping to bring at least one of them to BGSU. Thus, I expect that the graduate coordinator, Dr. Klopfer and you, as colleagues of color, are equally supportive of me and my profession. The comment of the graduate coordinator in his email to me “Since you have opted to appeal to Dale, it is best to let the appeal process play out”, was not appropriate. 

I am not talking here about the 8GB USB, full of documentaries about the WWII atrocities, which was anonymously slipped under my office door by a colleague from another department some time ago (I kept silent although I still have the evidence with fingerprints on it and a student as a witness). I am talking here about the student recruitment process which should be transparent and inclusive to all of us.


  • Then everything else, after the letter to the Provost, became BGSU’s ‘business as usual’ for a white Christian female faculty:  a letter from the Associate Dean suggesting what rights or options I had/selected; a video conference and hidden whisperers who were suggesting the questions; many non-related questions to divert the conversation from my complains while trying to find anything to blame me; the report (yet to come) with the same known outcome just to pretend their effort to make the final satisfaction and protect themselves in case I decide to sue them (I will have a separate column on the type of the questions and their analysis). The next step is HR and the process will be just repeated….. After all, many hours spent on meetings and writings, lots of money spent for nothing, just to avoid answering 4 simple questions. … and all I wanted to know was why I was not assigned a single graduate student during the recruitment processes in the last two years, NOT in just ONE BUT in TWO graduate programs, when more than 10 students applied and wanted me to be their mentor.

After the video conference I answered: “”””Thank you, Ted, for your time and effort to help the school. I hope my suggestions were useful and I hope that your report will bring success to the school in the long run.  Diversity in the school should not be just a quota but should help building a solid work environment. I am looking forward to seeing all the answers on the questions, which I directed to the graduate coordinator and then to the Provost, to encourage transparency and correctness of the student recruitment process. Unfortunately, I grew up in a communist system and I do not support secretive and tightly organized processes or any form of exclusion or discrimination in academia. Truly, I run away from that when I was young. “””””

It has been already a couple of months and I have still not received the answers.  Perhaps, “BOWLING GREEN….” means a watermelon: Green on the Outside, Red on the Inside, hmm.

Nevertheless, I would like to mention an interview named “History is going backwards as violence against European women rises” with a woman of color Ayaan Hirsi Ali who wrote the book “Prey: Immigration, Islam, and the Erosion of Women’s Rights”. She said: “Immigrants are coming from countries where women are not treated with respects and many of the men who are coming in, are displaying some sort of attitude toward women that they have in their own countries. Women in Europe are now facing all sorts of harassment, from verbal to physical harassment, and much more. This is clearly correlated with immigrants and their attitudes towards women …right now, European women are facing lots of pressure due to the scale of the problem in Europe.  It is a concept of ‘culture clashes’ where men come from countries where ‘good women’ are women who are expected to behave in a certain way, who are submissive and who obey their male guardians, who stay out of what is considered ‘a trouble’ in the public space, and who cover themselves. ……..On a micro level, once these men are in and given permission to stay, they must be put through ….they must be immersed in programs of integration or assimilation …they need to learn  what is normal, what is acceptable and what is not. …”


Dec 24, 2019


They call it “mobbing” (https://www.newsweek.com/they-call-it-mobbing-159101)

I call it “PROFESSIONAL RAPE”. Why rape? Because they impose power and psychological superiority over you while they keep your hands tied, all with intention to hurt you, to destroy your psychological stability and to drive you out.

…….and the process continues.

When I met the Dean the very first time five years ago (yes, the same Dr. Dean), I was shocked when I heard his public negative vocabulary about the BGSU President at that time – a Christian white woman. A couple of years later she resigned / accepted an early retirement offer and left. ….. When I met the Dean the very last time a few months ago, I was shocked when I heard his words “Yes, there will be cutting of some positions soon. For instance, nobody knows what will happen with your remote sensing courses” – he said in front of three colleagues while looking me, a Christian white woman, straight to the eyes”. Who is he working for? – It crossed my mind.

Since then, other devilish things happened and were communicated through his prophet, the School Director: 1) he saw my graduate course problematic as he said “had the low number of students”, even though the number doubled last year and was always higher or about the same as other graduate courses; 2) BGSU suddenly decided to send some public health undergraduate students to take my remote sensing class; the students had to switch from nutrition science to satellite science. Of course, the students struggled; 3) Out of several professors nominated for some decision-making service positions, I was the only one (really, the only one) excluded, with no position assigned. “I will not justify my decision to you” – the School Director said when I complained how I was far more competent for two coordinator positions than others given the number of my published papers. But he assigned the positions to two men, both from the minority groups, accidentally or not. “Ah, once again, no luck for a white Christian woman” – I said to myself and returned to my office with my hands tied. Then those two men became the Director’s prophets. 4) Soon after, the graduate coordinator prophet suggested that remote sensing was not science but rather a tool and that my courses should be part of the already-failed non-traditional geospatial graduate program; I bet he would never say anything like that if I was a man; 5) Soon after, the undergraduate coordinator prophet suggested that my undergraduate remote sensing course should become part of the geography program, the program that has not been functioning for at least 6 years and will not be functioning for another 106 years at BGSU; 6) In addition, the School Director stripped me of the right to vote for the successful geology curriculum (where I work successfully all these years), and put me in the geography curriculum committee where I would be the one who would have to vote for my remote sensing courses if I wanted to survive. Didn’t I say that the geography program has not been functioning for at least 6 years and will not be functioning for another 106 years at BGSU. They set me up to score an own goal, an ‘autogol’. “Ah, once again, no luck for a white Christian woman” – I closed the Director’s email and returned to my Christmas celebration with my hands tied.

Several patterns within the concept of professional rape are here observed: a) inciting your fear over possibly losing your job, which may cause anxiety, stress and depression with serious health consequences; You also fear to take your sabbatical leave because your position can be axed while you are away (see the attached article); b) excluding you from decision-making  positions important for your success and you never advance; c) underestimating and laughing at your professional PhD background gained at the university ranked as 28th in the world just because you are a woman; d) creating programs prone to failure and placing your courses there so that you die alive and must either leave or become fired; e) there is no balance between minority and majority groups at BGSU, and the professional competence is irrelevant.

Women are always the first target of any totalitarian regime. Neither racism nor reverse racism should be part of democracy. Neither mobbing nor professional rape should be part of academia.


April 27, 2019

#MeToo at BGSU

Everyone shouted ‘Congratulations!’  But, I was not trilled at all; my emotions were shut down; I was tired, too tired. It has been a tremendous psychological pressure to work constantly under BGSU’s maltreatment and, at the same time, try to become, one of the best, associate professors. And, I know, it is not over.

BGSU already warned me about their new sick plan: To create a non-sense evening geospatial program for non-traditional (working) people – To put me in this program, while they would cancel ONLY MY daily graduate research and teaching courses – Then, to cancel the newly organized evening program, as no a single working person in this CORN-AND-NOTHING-ELSE surrounding area would ever drive for hours after work to attend this non-sense program – Then, to cancel my position as they would no longer need me.

When I was a child in Croatia I remember the regime: First, Christian prominent leaders (presidents/directors) were forced to resign or retire – They were then replaced with communists using the ‘Peter principle’  – All attempts of Christian professors as intellectuals to succeed were punished, their individual expressions suppressed, their fear of losing their job incited, their dossiers lost; they were falsely accused of fascism or other lies; they were emotionally crashed, and at the end they were fired, imprisoned, and they simply vanished overnight. There was no difference between communism and fascism; the packaging was just different as lies made people blind to see the truth.

For more than five years, BGSU hurt me by: advising my graduate students to give up my course; sending last-minute unsigned acceptance letters to my international students; advising students not to take my courses and my mentorship for which I was hired or they would lose funding; ignoring and excluding me from university (funding) opportunities; limiting my computer and software resources; tricking me to sign false statements which were in disagreement with my contract; not allowing me to have PhD students; not assigning a mentor to me as to everybody else; purposely excluding me from university advertisements to attract students; negatively voting for me with no professional reasons; losing my dossier by the Human Resources (HR) department; practicing microaggression against me by various comments; lying and falsely accusing me of fascism; issuing a disciplinary letter with lies and no arguments; insisting on placing me in the false program with intention of firing me; hiring lawyers who falsely supports BGSU and their Union without arguments; inciting my fear by telling me and other professors how my courses will be cancelled while at the same time playing with their fear to stay silent and agreeable, etc. etc………….but I haven’t vanished yet.

Not to mention the jail sentence of the BGSU vice president and general counsel Sean FitzGerald, the same counsel who harassed me during the meetings and told me everything about another BGSU case that involved a person with the same background as mine, hmmm. (https://www.sent-trib.com/news/bgsu-lawyer-put-on-leave/article_ed49156a-5fae-11e9-af99-076be28ea865.html).


May 8, 2018


SHUT UP YOUR MOUTH AND STOP WRITING! HAH, NOW WE WILL SEE WHICH CAME FIRST, THE CHICKEN OR THE EGG! The Bowling Green State University (BGSU) Union/FA representative Dr. Philip Stinson said to me in front of Dr. David Jackson, the Union/FA President ….and then they all set me up, or, not. 

In recent months, we have heard a lot about sexual/racial harassment in Hollywood and sports industry, but nothing from science and academia. Women in science and academia are afraid to go public simply because there are so few women in STEM fields and losing their jobs and those 60-70k per year is not an option. It is not Hollywood; the reality is different.

I was victimized by the IEEE organization (https://www.ieee.org/). It is not a secret – many reputable female and male researchers are aware of IEEE’s ‘fabricating-pornography-and-sharing-prostitutes’ practices. Male and female prostitutes, incorporated as PhD students or post-doctorates, are shared between the male members and with other organizations/academia, while the real female researchers are constantly disgraced. Is this why IEEE is the biggest engineering society, is this what keeps all those (old) men together? To save my job and yet to inform and help other women and young men, I started writing the blog SilentScience. Soon after BGSU discovered the site, they started bullying me while discriminating me at multiple levels, just to get rid of me. All started with Dr. Charles Onasch and Dr. Mike Ogawa. BGSU went that far that they falsely accused me of anti-Semitism during meetings behind closed doors, the conviction that I can easily argue as I recorded all meetings. During the meetings with BGSU Faculty Association (FA, i.e., Union), including General Counsel Sean Fitzgerald, I was bullied, provoked and falsely accused by FA and BSGU. The lovely female FA lawyer Jessica Monroe (Schwarzwald McNair & Fusco LLP), who supposed to protect me, literally said only one sentence, a very smart sentence, during the whole meeting and it was: “Can you send me your private emails?”. Soon after, Dr. Raymond Craig, the Dean, issued me a disciplinary letter falsely accusing me of saying anti-Semitic sentences during the meeting, without paying attention that he diminished values of the holocaust victims in his letter, saying “there is little sense in the stories about holocaust victims” – THIS IS ANTISEMITIC indeed.

BGSU made a terrible mistake. They tried to punish me because I was Croatian but they didn’t know that I was a granddaughter of a holocaust prisoner #6034; page number 1146, camp: Flobenburg. There is no person in this world that I would ever discriminate against in any way; my students know that very well and they are reading this text right now. The external BGSU lawyer Mechelle Zarou (Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick) spent 7 hours in my office listening the recordings and now BGSU wants them.

In September 2017, I hired a lawyer for the Civil Rights Violations, Florence Murray (Murray & Murray), whose mother was a good friend of Bill Balzer, BGSU Vice President for Faculty Affairs, who was also involved in the process, hmmm. ALL she wanted was to give my recordings to BGSU. When I refused to give them directly to BGSU before the court/judge listens the content, she withdrew from the case.

To protest against IEEE and BSGU I have decided to start a hunger strike today Tuesday morning (May 8 2018) at BGSU, Bowling Green, Ohio (190 Overman Hall). I tried several options including the private lawyer who betrayed me, and the Federal Equal Employment department who said that this was too complex for them. I want to show how female faculties are treated in research and academia. I was advised not to go against Sean Fitzgerald; apparently he is a very powerful man and the systems would always support him. This is just adding to the whole story about the “abuse of power”. They wanted to get me, but perhaps I got them. In Ohio, it is allowed to record the meetings if you participate in the conversation.

You will be able to hear all my recordings on this site soon.

Day 4 today May 11 2018- I will try to go to Day 6. By then I will have enough material for my blog and my book.

Hm, my grandfather hungry and weak in Floßenbürg camp – Hm, me hungry and weak in BGSU camp(us) ! What is the difference? __________________________________________________________





Cha(t) – nu – (s)sot = Silly naked cat

Being a high functioning psychopath and narcissistic feminine homosexual, Jocelyn Chanussot has a problem fitting into ‘normal’ society. After doing nothing and just watching the world, the Albert Cohen’s character Solal inspires him to ‘die’ and then ‘resurrect’ as Double Jesus, Cha(t) – nu – (s)sot, or reborn Solal, when he becomes the master of his own antichrist crime in order to be accepted by the society. Like Solal, his desire to professionally succeed, Jocelyn expresses through his, believed to be true, Jewish ethnicity. He gets his PhD in engineering, what allows him to enter the professional discipline where homosexuals are common, and women scarce. Joining IEEE, where his almost Shakespearian homosexuality is equally cherished as his ethnic belongness, he uses his strong sociopathic / psychopathic skills in his “movement up the social ladder, a geographic voyage and an entry to the world of gentile men to save his (IEEE Jewish) people through the rabbit-who-feeds-dogs-to-dogs approach. By sacrificing Gentile/Christian women sexually and professionally to old men, vastly to Gentile/Christian men themselves, he becomes highly accepted and respected by the society.

While he sees Gentile/Christian women as sadistic Europe and female animals, his sinister strategy of disgracing them involves two main directions: 1) one where real prostitutes become involved, being presented as students or post-doctorates, and then being sexually ‘shared’ among male researchers; and 2) the other where true female researchers are sexually disgraced by fabricating their privacy, leaving them with no chance to become professionally successful. This tactic, cleverly developed to the finest details, satisfies not just IEEE but it also attracts numerous IEEE exhibitors, professors and researchers worldwide. Above all, the sexual machinery, which Jocelyn Chanussot develops, feeds his sociopathic / psychopathic nature suppressing his constant internal anger and thirst to hurt or even to kill. Taking control of people’s lives, what he founds to be the answer to his ‘cat-like cursory’ life, provides him with the ‘balance of the Universe’, where he enjoys the multi-layered pleasure  through:  1) his promiscuous nature where he enjoys young men while homosexualising them and providing them with co-authorship and research awards, in return; 2) his hatred of women / misogynism while punishing them for being ‘female animals’ who love men just to satisfy their sexual needs; 3) his insecurity because of his child-like physical appearance and fear of becoming an old ‘sexually-useless’ man unattractive to other homosexuals; 4) his sociopathic fetishism and pleasure of either controlling, or hurting men and women who he cannot control, which is seen as his turning-on sexual tool; 5) his desire to punish Christian/Gentile women and men for the past, as (Eastern) Europeans were known for their rejection of non-Christians and homosexuals; 6) his sickly self-centered/narcissistic desire to attract and seek constant attention of other men; 7) his desire to involve Gentile/Christian men in his sexual machinery while controlling them and consequently making them less powerful; 8) his help to his own Jewish people in IEEE to become the biggest engineering society in the world by involving the whole network from the hell, as Jocelyn Chanussot postulates, and people from NASA, ESA, DLR, ISPRS, US Air Force, industry and academia in his sexual machinery, while enhancing the IEEE’s influence over Europe despite their US origin. This leads, in his view, to the disintegration of sadistic European science and, at the same time, to the highest impact factors of IEEE journals.

Like Solal, Jocelyn dares to develop a flirting sexual relationship with a mature Christian woman. He doesn’t just want her to love him because he’s gorgeous, as he strongly believes, but because he wants to feel his sociopathic power over her, seeing her as sadistic Europe. This coincides with Albert Cohen’s Solal, but Jocelyn takes a step further – He sees her as his narcissistic female in her full capacity of being a female animal and he wants to see her death before proceeding to his own death. It stays unclear, however, if he feels her death as a deed of liberation from the feminine side of his homosexuality, or as the liberation from a beauty competitive to his own narcissistic feminine goddess of Ishtar/Astarte. The turning point or climax happens when the woman, although hurt by Jocelyn’s disgracing sexual games, does not want to give-up her professional accomplishments gained alongside her motherhood of two adult children, and she fights back. Being rejected, Jocelyn losses his capability of controlling his narcissistic self-centered nature and faces another challenge of his ‘cursory life’. Differently from Solal, who failed to protect his Jewish people from the totalitarian fascism, Jocelyn saves his Jewish and homosexual IEEE people through the totalitarian communism.  In return, the IEEE society applauds his criminal charges and tries to save Jocelyn from his own suicide.

In parallel to the political and sexual scenes, a beautiful orange cat named Serge, given to the woman as a gift just before she started her relationship with Jocelyn, becomes part of her life. However, in less than two years Serge accidentally kills himself by jumping from a high-level balcony. This event, given it happens just before the woman confronts Jocelyn and reveals his crime, triggers the bitter sensation about the real ending of his ‘cursory’ life.