Esther Rockett sells herself online as a ‘Health Care Activist’, and in her acupuncture clinic in Toowong, Queensland, as a Women’s Health practitioner. But her vicious online conduct, that has at times escalated offline as well, must call to question if she really is entitled to either one of these titles.
Esther Rockett’s blog offerings have targeted a number of women, seeking to damage and indeed trash their reputations through direct insults, and adding them to her ‘naming names’ page: a spiteful, grandiose production whose sole purpose is to harm people’s careers and reputations. Esther Rockett uses the threat of individuals appearing on this page with a sadistic glee, attempting to wield what she considers the power of ‘exposing’ people as connected to Universal Medicine. Observers can easily see through this display as a disgraceful attempt to bully and intimidate.
Natalie and Miranda Benhayon recently received a serve of Esther Rockett’s malice. Esther Rockett has basically portrayed these women as minions and slaves of Serge Benhayon. Shame on Esther, what she has presented would be comical if it were not such a disgraceful exhibition of misogyny.
We have to point out that Esther Rockett has never met these women; she has no knowledge of their private lives and scant knowledge of their public life either. It appears that Esther inhabits a virtual reality that is in fact removed from reality. Cyber-bullies can become removed from the reality of who their targets actually are, the ‘you can’t see me and I can’t see you’ of the virtual world means that the troll can paint whatever picture they choose of their victim, and this Esther Rockett does with malice and vitriol when it comes to the Benhayon women.
Esther Rockett has accused the very beautiful and talented Natalie Benhayon of ‘sexually grooming’ young women for her father, Serge Benhayon, which accompanies the outrageous lie that Esther Rockett has maliciously sown that he has a disturbing interest in young women. They make the vicious and baseless suggestion that Natalie’s work ‘opens up his market and supplies him with new prey’. It is an appalling and offensive statement to make about a 24-year-old woman who is dedicated to supporting all women, including young women, to improve their health and wellbeing in all the work that she does.
Esther Rockett appears to be watching Natalie very, very closely – she makes comments on her blogs suggesting that she knows what Natalie Benhayon is doing and where she is going. Esther Rockett appears to have taken issue with a photo of Natalie dancing that was posted to Natalie’s Facebook page. The said photo has been described in lurid terms with Esther Rockett commenting that she thought Natalie was ‘sexualising’ herself ‘publicly’. A few putrid comments from Esther followed saying a bit of ‘sexual disinhibition’ should be fine since she would indulge in a ‘free for all’ if she could.
Esther also makes a weak attempt to suggest that she holds the view that a woman’s body is her own, although Esther’s commentary on everything ‘Natalie’, suggests that Esther considers that the body under discussion is an object that is fair game for her vitriol – not really a perspective granting true bodily autonomy. True autonomy would allow space for Natalie to celebrate herself in whatever way she sees fit, without comment from Esther Rockett.
It takes little to look behind the misogyny of Esther Rockett’s comments to find the complete contempt and loathing she holds towards a beautiful young woman, a young woman whom she has never met and does not know:
‘Imagine if Princess or I got up on a table in little red dresses, acted out a lap dance and then posted it publicly on Facebook? What would the Esoteric love-lys say about us? Would we get 163 likes? Or just a lot of back stabs from the Yammerati? …’
‘Look Natalie, it’s your body, and your right to do what you want with it, but to sexualize yourself publicly and then market your business on the basis that women are long suffering victims of male sexual objectification is more than a bit rich…’
Esther’s lies and misrepresentations are exposed by merely looking at the picture of Natalie, a very beautiful 24-year-old doing what 24-year-olds do – enjoying herself on a night out. We might add a night out where she holds herself with complete dignity, self-respect and not a drop of alcohol.
It is to be noted that Natalie is an extraordinary 24-year-old who is sought internationally to present at seminars and provide services with complementary therapies. In her private practice she is booked out many months in advance. She has pioneered new and innovative products such as the Our Cycles App, supporting men and women in reflecting on the rhythms and cycles by which they live. In her work in her many projects, such as the Women in Livingness magazine, she provides an inspiration and role model to many women.
Is it Natalie Benhayon’s success that makes Esther Rockett so vicious? Is it Natalie’s poise and maturity that inflames Esther Rockett to write about her in such vitriolic terms? And why, one must ask, is a mature woman so assiduously following and writing such malicious, and potentially harming material about a young woman half her age?
Natalie Benhayon, at 24, has a life that could be envied. Perhaps she has everything Esther Rockett does not: an incredibly successful career so young; a life that is independent and free; a close, supportive family and many others who call her a dear friend and all who love her dearly and celebrate her success with her.
Esther makes the derisory suggestion that Natalie is beholden to her father, since “She’s not one for original thoughts.” Might we suggest this is spewed out in jealousy for a life better lived than her own miserable existence where her sole pleasure appears to be the sadistic glee she experiences in her malicious blogging.
Esther Rockett paints Miranda Benhayon as a mysterious woman that people only glimpse and never hear speak, and venomously suggests that she cannot think for herself, nor do anything alone; Esther Rockett writes:
“Has Miranda Benhayon ever been sighted out with friends, or out shopping on her own? Doing anything on her own? In the past twenty years?”
A woman who supposedly seeks to support other women as a ‘Women’s Healthcare practitioner’ should perhaps consider that demeaning other women is probably not going to be good for business.
She paints both Natalie Benhayon and Miranda Benhayon as being controlled by Serge Benhayon, suggesting that:
In the previous comment, the reference that Rockett is making to Deborah about ‘earning her keep very young’ is the disgusting and utterly false innuendo that Serge Benhayon had commenced a sexual relationship with Miranda when she was a teenager living with Serge Benyahon’s family, including his then wife, Deborah Benhayon. This disgusting suggestion is certainly intended to humiliate the women concerned.
What could Esther Rockett, Women’s Healthcare practitioner seek to achieve by attempting to denigrate these women in such an appalling and careless way? Does she imagine that she is only harming Serge Benhayon in what must be described as a vilification campaign against all the women in his life? Does she conveniently choose to see these women as mere pawns in her game of ‘bringing down Serge Benhayon’?
In this, Esther Rockett has done little for the advancement of women by promulgating and supporting malicious and filthy lies spread by the emotionally contorted Lance Martin and his cyber-troll ally Robert Macindoe, where the three have suggested that Serge Benhayon commenced a sexual relationship with Miranda when she was thirteen years old and that she was manipulated into a marriage with Serge Benhayon.
Lance Martin’s disgraceful suggestions and innuendoes have been discussed in another blog, but to recap, Esther Rockett published this material on her site and in this way perpetrated her own brand of malicious abuse. From the disgusting suggestion by Lance Martin that Miranda was ‘home skooled’, with an obvious sexual inference:
And many, many references by Robert Macindoe and Lance Martin about Miranda, for instance, Macindoe writes:
The malicious innuendoes are obvious and Esther has perpetuated them, in a recent post she writes:
“Serge Benhayon was a big talking tennis coach turned self-styled messiah, prophet and healer, who persuaded the parents of pupil, 13 year old Miranda Smith, and others to move into his home so they could receive his ‘elite’ coaching program. Miranda entered an intimate relationship with Benhayon at some point and is now Benhayon’s wife.”
The only abuse Miranda has suffered is the intolerable lies that Esther Rockett has created with her ‘colleagues’, Lance Martin and Robert Macindoe. Esther Rockett appears to make much of herself being the ‘salvation’ and liberator of those she misguidedly considers need her help. They do not.
Online abuse does not constitute any form of ‘salvation’. Whatever justifications Esther Rockett has for her misguided hate campaign against Serge Benhayon, does it really justify making absolutely false suggestions that Miranda Benhayon was manipulated into a sexual relationship at thirteen with her current husband?
A note to Esther:
Attempts at public humiliation are not, or should not be the practice of a Women’s Healthcare practitioner and cannot be justified by your other hat ‘Health Care Activist’ either.
Rachel Mascord has observed that:
“Esther Rockett has tried, and resoundingly failed to go head to head with the incredible Cambridge trained lawyer Alison Greig. Alison’s off the Richter intelligence is matched by her deep sense of ethics and her commitment to truth. She is an impeccable researcher, and has dug deeply into Esther’s sources. Alison Greig has completely exposed Esther Rockett’s sources on brainwashing theory as being completely discredited in relation to their application to ‘cults’ and religious groups where there is no physical coercion, and as Alison states “in over 50 years no-one has done any research to show that there is any foundation for them – in 50 years you would think there might be some scientific evaluation if there was anything to find that supports Esther’s sources.”
UM FACTS has challenged all that Esther Rockett stands for. All that Esther Rockett has managed to counter the challenges to her own lies is to call Alison Greig derogatory names, resorting to schoolyard bullying and nothing more.
Alison Greig, apparently attracted the ire of Esther Rockett when Esther Rockett discovered that Alison Greig was going to expose her for the cyber-bully she is. We have to add that Esther Rockett only discovered this because she had possession of stolen private emails and communications sent by Alison to a group of Universal Medicine students. Esther Rockett proceeded to attempt a campaign of public humiliation, not dissimilar to the gutter press stealing material they have no right to and publishing it. Like the conduct of many cyber-bullies (and her colleague in her endeavours, Lance Martin), Esther Rockett’s moral compass appears to be broken beyond repair and so she sails rudderless in the dark.
Many who are cyber-bullied suffer devastating consequences, such as the high risk of depression and suicide and social isolation. Indeed one wonders at how Esther Rockett can conceive of herself as a Women’s Health provider when her main focus in life appears to be attacking others as an anonymous internet troll. However, Alison Greig will not suffer as many others have with such abuse, as Serge Benhayon comments, “it is fortunate that Alison Greig has a well rounded life of joy and widespread success with regard to strong family and friends who adore her deeply” and this is indeed an antidote to Esther’s vitriol.
Esther Rockett is apparently oblivious to the fact that cyber-stalking and cyber-bullying would not be reflective of someone presenting herself as a ‘Health Care Activist’ and her conduct is a long way from someone concerned with Women’s Health. The sub-clinical sociopathic and sadistic tendencies exhibited by Internet trolls do not appear to be concomitant with being a Women’s Health practitioner.
Esther Rockett has maliciously made and endorsed remarks about the solicitor, Serryn O’Regan that have been part of a pathetic attempt to discredit this woman’s remarkable integrity, with comments such as ‘Serryn O’Regan, where’s the money?’ And to make her appear foolish ‘right after she was abducted by Arcturans’.
Let us be clear, Esther Rockett has not met Serryn O’Regan and nor have any of Esther Rockett’s cronies. Serryn is an outstanding solicitor, with years of corporate experience. She is also a woman of heartfelt integrity, with a mind that is second to none for detail, and the delivery of truth and true service in all that she does.
Another of Esther Rockett’s targets, Paula Fletcher, a beautiful highly intelligent woman (and solicitor) who brings true grace to the law, has also been the recipient of disgusting allegations and insults. In Paula’s case, Esther Rockett has tried to cast doubt on Paula’s integrity as a lawyer and has made false allegations that the talented lawyer ‘specialises in vexatious litigation’ in the form of ‘baseless Apprehended Violence orders’.
Paula has done no such thing. But this has not stopped Esther – she asks:
Well none as it so happens Esther! But the question, loaded with the false supposition that there have been numerous such cases, has the malicious effect of suggesting that this has occurred. So it promulgates Esther’s lies.
Esther Rockett has made up other extra-ordinary false claims about Paula Fletcher, suggesting that Paula has participated in various activities that would appear to be against her client’s interests, and suggesting evidence of wrongdoing when there is none. For instance, she ridiculously claims that: ‘portions of property settlements are donated to [UM] and Paula Fletcher handles these ’ – there is no such evidence, as this has never been done.
Esther Rockett further suggests that ‘We are gathering evidence that she is abusing Legal Aid funds to bring vexatious AVOs and deliberately protracted proceedings.’ Esther makes the false imputation that there is such evidence. There is none, and indeed there could not be, since AVO’s are a police matter – and we suggest it would be impossible to obtain Legal Aid funding for a private AVO application if the police had determined not to grant one. But this doesn’t stop Esther’s invective.
Oh, and conducting ‘deliberately protracted proceedings’ on legal aid funding? Oh please, do you know anything about such matters Esther? Well obviously not. Just a pointer – legal aid funding and protracted proceedings don’t actually go together, unless you think Paula goes out of her way to work for nothing once the limited legal aid funding allocated has been used. Not really what you are suggesting, is it Esther? Esther’s bold claims of having evidence to prove any of these matters are false and the threats that ‘we are organizing to have Universal Law brought to account via due process’ have come to nothing. Of course, since there was no foundation whatsoever to these lies!
But how does harassing and attacking another woman’s business equate with health-care? How does it fit with being a ‘Health Care Activist’? For most people faced with such vile abuse and lies it would certainly cause enormous distress. Certainly not an offering promoting health and wellbeing; but hurt and distress are Esther Rockett’s intent. That is how cyber-bullies and Internet trolls operate: the more harm the better. Esther Rockett has attacked Paula Fletcher with sadistic glee and this is hardly activity commensurate with Esther Rockett’s pretence of being a Women’s Healthcare practitioner.
In each and every case, Esther Rockett has never met any of the women that she so abuses, not once. She has nothing to base her insults upon, they are it seems, at least on the surface, drawn from an antipathy to all things Universal Medicine. Her antipathy apparently gives her license to throw insults of every kind at these women. And let us say, the targets that she slings such derogatory and offensive slurs at, are by and large exclusively women, and the tone is such that you would have expected it to come from the mouth of a misogynist male.
Esther Rockett writes, addressing Paula Fletcher:
‘you carried on with hysterics about husbands needing explicit permission every time they touch their wives in defence of Serge Benhayon’, and goes on, in reference to this supposedly ‘hysterical’ suggestion, to say to Paula: ‘You’re reprehensible and another vile, bullying, high status hypocrite.’
She makes other various nasty comments about Paula Fletcher, who is actually an experienced and talented family lawyer, referring to ‘piss weak anonymous whining’.
The childish quality of these offerings cannot escape notice, and perhaps reflect a compromised social development on the part of the writer. Esther Rockett rarely gets beyond schoolyard bullying or telling outright lies on her blogs. As we noted before, the moral compass is broken.
- The women listed in this article are but a small handful of those Esther Rockett has ‘named’ and sought to harm.
- The blogs written by Esther Rockett represent the highest form of hypocrisy. They are abuse dressed up as salvation.
- Esther Rockett’s lies may fool a few, but they do not fool the many. In time they will be seen by all for what they truly are… a campaign of bitter revenge that has sought to destroy the women who are living in a way that Esther Rockett cannot abide.
- She is trying to annihilate the very essence of what it is for a woman to live in power and grace.
We are left with concern. Concern that a woman who considers that she is a Women’s Health practitioner, a woman who represents that she is offering healing to women, could hold such contempt for women she has never met and such a deluded view that her vicious attacks of other women could be considered their salvation. Esther Rockett, you cannot seriously consider yourself to be a Women’s Health practitioner or Health Care activist.