18.09.2026

Two women give birth at the same time. One baby dies and one survives. The women fight over the remaining baby, saying each of them is the mother. King Solomon’s solution? That we cut the baby in half and give each half to each mother. The real mother will not allow this to happen while the false mother will. This is the supposed wisdom and legal acumen of Solomon.

I wrote about how this story in the Bible reveals the monstrosity of the law. Let’s have another look at that today.

Solomon as the King, as The Father, as The Law, what does he count on? He counts on the real mother being a real mother. Not wanting her son to die. However, he also counts on the false mother, the usurper woman, to want the son to die. To want the son to be cut in half.

It does not make sense. This is a woman who has just had a baby that died. The whole reason that she took the other woman’s baby is that she wants to have a real baby. So why would the false mother even choose to have half of a dead baby? In fact, Solomon’s supposed wisdom would only draw outrage from both mothers. It would not produce the truth.

King Solomon’s law and The Father’s Law assumes that the false, usurping mother is a being of terrible violence and injustice. The bringer of death. This is the misogyny at the heart of The Father’s Law in a patriarchy. This is how the law conceives of women. The devouring Mother.

Yet, bizarrely, The Father’s Law enacts the wish of violence and devouring of the false Mother. Solomon says that he will cut the baby in half. In fact, the law models itself on this false, devouring, usurping mother.

This is a case of the law’s projection. It uses the false devouring and usurping Mother as a screen which actually reflects back its own being in injustice, in violence and duress, in usurpation. What is being mirrored is the law’s reality. It is not the false mother that is unjust. It is the law itself. Why else would the law mirror the false usurping woman?

At the same time, the legal strategy attacks the real mother. She is subjected to the symbolic violence of the law that will devour her baby.

This is the reality of the patriarchal Judaeo-Christian law that has been inherited by the West. It is based in structural misogyny and deflection. It is against The Mother. It is aggression against The Mother. And yet, this is what is described as wisdom.

14.09.2026

Two women give birth at the same time. One baby dies and one survives. The women fight over the remaining baby, saying each of them is the mother. King Solomon’s solution? That we cut the baby in half and give each half to each mother. The real mother will not allow this to happen while the false mother will. This is the supposed wisdom and legal acumen of Solomon.

I wrote about how this story in the Bible reveals the monstrosity of the law. Let’s have another look at that today.

The Judaeo-Christian law separates. From The Mother. While the case is ostensibly about overcoming the separation from the mother, and giving the mother back her child, does it not strike the reader as weird that the whole legal tactic and strategy relies on symbolically separating the mother from the child? After all, Solomon says to cut the baby in half so that the Mother will insist on being separated from her child. Why is this contradiction and paradox built into the tale, that in not separating the mother from the child, we are separating the mother from the child?

Precisely because the Father’s law, the law of King Solomon, is structural misogyny and calculated to be against The Mother. The law has a mother phobia, about which I have copiously written, being a worshipper of The Mother.

Again, the law divides the baby’s body through violence. One half is given to the lie: the lying mother. One half is given to the mother that will not accept it. That is, the law rewards the liar, it rewards the usurper, it denies the desire of the real Mother through its divisions and orderings of the body and of reality. Here, one may note, that Freud has on occasion referred to the baby of a mother as her phallus. And the phallus is the symbol of power.

Lastly, the law of the Father as usurper. What do the lying mother and the lying King have in common? That they are both liars and usurpers. The lying mother wants to take the place of the real mother. The lying king wants to take the place of the real mother as well, taking ownership of the baby’s body and dividing the spoils as he sees fit. The body is not his to give, why should he have any say in it?

This, like I said yesterday, this is the legal culture that the West has inherited. Unsound, lying, biased, misogyny, a corruption of patriarchal power. And this law presents itself as wisdom? It is this law that presents itself as the unveiling of the truth? It is this law that regulates relationships like those of mother and child? It is this law that we read stories of, watch films about? This law is nothing less than monstrosity.