Lying as PR: AVFM’s Janet Bloomfield libels Jessica Valenti — then brags about it
Janet Bloomfield, self-acknowledged liar
A Voice for Men’s “social media director” Janet Bloomfield is proving to be quite the innovator in the world of public relations. You may recall her cheeky approach to publicizing the recent AVFM conference, which involved awarding herself “whore points” for calling critics of AVFM “whores.”
Now she’s moved on to straight-up libel, making up fake quotes in order to make feminist writer Jessica Valenti look bad, and then bragging about it on her blog.
This whole sordid episode began several days ago when Valenti, on vacation, decided to send a message to “all the misogynist whiners in my feed today” in the form of a photo of her on a beach wearing a t-shirt saying “I bathe in male tears.”
The AVFM social media attack squad seized on this at once, with Bloomfield telling her followers, wrongly, that the picture had been posted in response to a question about male suicide. When Valenti corrected her on this point, Bloomfield offered a half-assed apology (“My bad”).
Then Bloomfield, demonstrating just how insincere her apology had been, decided to up the ante, concocting four “quotes” from thin air and attributing them to Valenti.
[EDIT: JB's Twitter account was suspended, so here's a screenshot of the tweets; I'll keep the original links up in case she's ever unsuspended, though that seems unlikely.]
https://twitter.com/JudgyBitch1/status/495366752168329216
https://twitter.com/JudgyBitch1/status/495367262187302913
https://twitter.com/JudgyBitch1/status/495367996337295360
https://twitter.com/JudgyBitch1/status/495374177013346304
Naturally, as you’ll see if you follow any of these Tweets back to their original context on Twitter, many of Bloomfield’s fans assumed that these quotes were real.
Needless to say, some responded to Bloomfield’s dirty tricks with all-too predictable harassment of her target:
After brazenly libeling Valenti, Bloomfield went on to boast about it on her blog. In a post with the smug title “Jessica Valenti is not having a good day,” she wrote:
Now, these fake quotes may have been “utterly plausible” only to those who are ignorant of Valenti’s work, but in the hothouse world of the Men’s Rights movement there are people who would probably believe that Valenti eats babies. As I noted, JB’s followers had no trouble believing them.
Later in the post Bloomfield added, with more than a hint of maliciousness:
It’s not clear how having made-up quotes attributed to you counts as “owning your shit,” but I guess I just don’t understand Bloomfield’s higher morality.
Needless to say, in the real world, deliberately publishing false information about someone in order to harm their reputation is libel.
When confronted with this on Twitter, Bloomfield offered some inventive excuses:
Later on she attempted to prove that her libelous fake Valenti quotes didn’t matter … by making up things about me:
https://twitter.com/JudgyBitch1/status/495684048237633536
As I noted,
Of course, I’m no lawyer. I can only hope that some people who are lawyers are taking a good hard look at Bloomfield’s lies.
I would encourage you all to screenshot or otherwise archive Bloomfield’s self-incriminatory blog post, as well as her tweets, just in case she decides to talk to a lawyer and take them all down.
At this point, I think it’s probably safe to assume that anything and everything anyone from AVFM says should be taken not with a grain but with an entire shaker of salt.
Posted on August 4, 2014, in a new woman to hate, a voice for men, antifeminism, antifeminist women, FemRAs, gloating, gullibility, harassment, hypocrisy, judgybitch, lying liars, misogyny, MRA, nonpology, sexual harassment, the c-word, twitter, whores and tagged a voice for men, anti-feminism, antifeminism, harassment, jessica valenti, libel, men's rights, misogyny, MRA, sexual harassment. Bookmark the permalink. 471 Comments.
Yay! Let’s hope you have enough influence to have MSM pick this up.
You do realize that “male tears” refers to all males including males who have committed suicide no? Why write “male tears” on a t-shirt and not “misogynist tears” if you are not a misandrist?
This is hilarious.
MRAs, you know how we’re always telling you that you don’t understand satire? You don’t understand satire.
PS “maisandry” – not a thing.
Or “misandry” even. /rolls eyes
Shaker of salt? I take it with all of the salt in the entire ocean, plus all the salt in the Dead Sea…
And Linda… it’s a spoof… a lot like my personal catch-phrase “I hate straight, white, cis-gendered, able-bodied men” (all of which I am).
“I used Poe’s law”
…
“I used Poe’s law”
…
What. The. Fuck.
Could Valenti pursue a libel case, citing harassment etc.? I’m not familiar with USA law, but it’d be nice to see JB being held accountable for the obviously malicious lies. Bet it’d cost a fair bit to pursue though…
Wow, JB is pathetically hungry for attention, isn’t she? Maybe she’d be happy to have a whole libel trial focused on her, in that case. (I doubt Valenti will bother, though.) It’s sad.
And then you remember she called trans people mentally ill — she actually said this, this isn’t something I’m making up — and it becomes impossible to feel sorry for her.
The problem is that Valenti would probably be considered a public figure by a court, and in many states if the plaintiff is a public figure he/she not only has to prove malicious intent but also that he/she was harmed as a result of the libel. She may not have a strong enough case.
She’s very focused.
I mean, laser-like focus.
I’m really starting to think that her whole job at AVFM is to be as controversial as possible, to get them any attention they can get. And to somehow paint Paul Elam as the moderate.
And this is the “social media driver” for Women Against Feminism.
hahahahahahahah. Pauses for breath. Hahahahahahahha.
ACTIVISM!
If you’re so concerned about the wellbeing of men and boys why does all your effort go into harming women? That’s a roundabout way to accomplish nothing (aside from harming women. Which I think may be of far more importance to you than any betterment to the lives of men and boys. Just MHO.)
Famous last words from one who wouldn’t know irony if it bit her. Which it just did. ON THE ASS.
Ugh… Although I would never choose to wear a “male tears” shirt myself, I’m not going to cry a river is someone else chooses to. Seriously, with a history of women being institutionalized because of showing emotions when men don’t want them to (hysteria anyone?), I don’t think a male tears shirt on anyone is that big of a deal. JB should get a hobby becaus she is obviously bored. It’s good to know she is at the same maturity level as my brother when we was six years old on long car trips…
I think it probably is her job to be more overtly absurd than Elam in order to make him look reasonable/honest/thoughtful/grounded.
It might work too. It’s not a terrible tactic.
More “activism” from JB: lying about David Futrelle on Reddit.
Snurk. To use the “popular” MR(B)M phraseology for over-the-hill feeeeemales, this one has just hit the wall. Any traffic WAF gets in future will be due to mockery and lulz, not sincere mainstream interest. Good job, Jan!
More like her job to be the person they can point to and say “see, women really are as horrible as we keep telling you they are”.
BTW, even the misters are pushing back on JB on that one. Well, most of them.
She certainly is doing her part to support the stereotype that “women lie about everything.”
So it’s only a spoof? Well how if a MRA would pose with a shirt saying “I bathe in female tears” you do know that you all would have reacted very differently? If you say your for equal treatment o the sexes it would be a good advice to start to treat them equally.
Oh and btw, equality of outcome and equality of opportunities are not the same thing. Just to remind you before you start bitching about the lack of female CEO:s
Those made-up quotes say a lot more about what Ms. Bloomfield thinks of men than what any feminist thinks of men.
And Linda Wong: “male tears” refers to the crocodile tears men “cry” when confronted with their misogyny. But I realize that sarcasm flies right over the heads of AVFM followers.
God, that Today Show interview (from the photo at the top)…
And now we turn to Janet Bloomfield, broadcasting live from her underground bunker in an undisclosed location in the rocky mountains, where the chemtrails and fluoridated water of the feminist-CIA secret police can’t get her…
Anyways. MRA’s lying is like the sun coming up. I’d be more surprised if it didn’t happen. They know that truth and reality don’t agree with their “philosophy”. Quick tip, fellas and ladies who are really really desperate male attention, if you have to bullshit yourself into believing the things you believe, it might be time to reevaluate.
I actually don’t care for the “Male Tears” novelties, specifically because anyone who’s not in on the joke won’t get it. But then, we’re talking about a site that thinks graphically describing Paul Elam’s beating women wank fantasies is “satire”, so, uh, they have no right to criticize literally anyone else on the planet.
Oh crap, there goes yet another irony meter. These people keep breaking them. I should send them the bill!
I dunno, that’s pretty light-hearted compared to the shit that comes out of their mouths on a regular basis.
You do know that the Paul Elam article was written as a satiric response to a jezebel article were feminists were bragging and laughing about beating the shit out of their boyfriends do you? http://jezebel.com/294383/have-you-ever-beat-up-a-boyfriend-cause-uh-we-have
andrea harris, so if a guy would wear a t-shirt with the text “I bathe in female tears” you feminists would be cool about it if he explaines that it referred to man-hating feminists only?
I’t hilarious that you don’t see the problem in advocating double standards and at the same time claiming you are fighting for equality. Ever wondered why you lack credibility in the eye of most normal and reasonable people?
Linda… “I bathe in male tears” does not have horrible harassment/abuse/patriarchal baggage attached to it. We live in a patriarchy, where women are not treated as equal to men in all ways (including opportunity and outcome). Women are raped more than men, abused more than men, make less than men, don’t have the same opportunities as men, and so on.
So you are 100% correct that if an MRA or just some dude wore an “I bathe in female tears”, we’d react quite differently, considering the history of how society has treated women verses how society has treated men.
Context. It means things.
Why didn’t someone tell me it was opposites day before Linda showed up? Give your friends a heads up, people. I was drinking a cup of tea when I read that last line, and keyboards aren’t free.
Yeah, on second thoughts, a libel case is more trouble than it’s worth- they don’t need any more publicity.
Besides, they’d only use it to claim they were being unfairly treated, because she said it was a joke and that makes anything she does totes ok. Just like if they were to say that the only reason you shouldn’t hit women is because you’d get in trouble for it, but then called that satire, that would obviously also be fine. /s
Linda, you do realize that Paul Elam is a professional cyberbully who proudly proclaims that lying, harassing and scaring the shit out of women gives him a boner, right? Frankly, if that man were even capable of tears, I would be sincerely surprised.
Now be off with you. It’s embarrassing to see someone spill so many words with so little basic reading comprehension.
Making stuff up about someone deliberately so that they will be harassed and then calling that harassment “owning your shit” is one of the more… direct examples of victim blaming I’ve seen.
Nathan, you obviously don’t have a clue.
The discrepancy in male vs female rape is not as large as you think, and btw men are murdered more often than women, suffer from violence more than women, die prematurely more often than women, more likely to become homeless, drug addicts etc than women are. It’s a joke to say that women have it worse because of lack of female CEO:s
Humans are a sexually dimorphic species, you do understand that sexual dimorphism is caused by the fact that males and females in a species has faced different adaptive problems during our evolutionary history. You do realize that men have higher variance in reproductive success than women which results in higher intrasexual competition? You do realize that this makes men the more aggressive and risk-taking sex? You do realize that this is the reason why men are more willing to take risks and make greater sacrifices in order to gain social status and domination?
If women would have been treated the same as men in our society far fewer women would have survived until old age throughout history. You do realize that society has always seen men as the disposable sex don’t you. I think the fact that throughout history women have always been more likely to die of old age than men speaks volumes about the supposed female oppression.
Don’t confuse me with a MRA, I think both MRA:s and todays feminists are equally pathetic. You blame the inequality of outcome at the top levels of society on patriarchy and discrimination, while MRA:s blame the ineqaulity at the bottom of society on a gynocentric society and discrimination. You are both equally pathetic and wrong. Equality of outcome of the sexes in a sexually dimorphic species is simply not possible.
I’m pretty sure the “male tears” t-shirt was satirical too. For some reason, Paul Elam writing a HILARIOUS bit on abusing women doesn’t deserve criticism but a sarcastic t-shirt does….?
And no, I wouldn’t go on a tirade of lies if someone wore a “female tears” t-shirt because I’m not a liar nor do my grievances require lying about.
And also no, equality of opportunities has not yet been achieved so looking at outcomes and saying “women just aren’t good at/don’t like responsibility and big paycheques” is fucking stupid.
Oh and btw, equality of outcome and equality of opportunities are not the same thing. Just to remind you before you start [criticizing] the lack of female CEO:s
They’re not the same thing but they’re correlated: If we don’t have equality of outcome, then it’s obvious that we don’t have equality of opportunity either.
Or are you using the Libertarian definition of “equality of opportunity”, as in “The rich and the poor have equal opportunities to get arrested for sleeping under bridges.”?
If so, then you’re right that they’re completely different things. But in that case “equality of opportunity” is just code for “maintaining the status quo” and it’s not an especially noble goal.
I don’t have a clue? I don’t have a fucking clue?
I feel like you don’t, Linda. For the record: 1 in 6 women have been or will be raped. The same is true for 1 in 33 men. This is according to our own fucking government.
This really is easily available information for anyone who knows how to use Teh Googlez.
Also… you’re “both sides are full of shit” crap?
Yeah.
No.
You may as well be saying that scientists and Creationists are both full of crap. Or scientists and AGW denialists. Or… well… you get the picture.
If that was satire, Elam just did a follow-up article that wasn’t satire with pretty much the same message. Or maybe he’ll tack on satire tags after the fact like he did the last time.
Lol, men as disposable.
All the while a third of female people were already dying in pregnancy and childbirth.
People have been pretty fucking disposable throughout history. Prior to highly effective contraception, all fertile women were subject to a life threatening condition due to their very biology. No shit they weren’t going to war. Women were already dying in massive numbers and if more of them were killed on the battlefield there’d be no more baby machines for the men who survived to take advantage of and rear their offspring.
Hey Linda, how about addressing the points we challeged you on, instead of going on yet another talking-points tangent? You’re not fooling anyone here with that. We’ve seen it all before. Repetition doesn’t make it any less stale.
Linda, you do realise that men are also the ones more likely to be committing most of those crimes? Also, you do realise that evopsych does not a solid argument make (#notallhumans, also you’re completely ignoring the effects of socialisation)? And you do realise that if men are the disposable sex, it’s kinda weird that historically, people have always wanted sons? I don’t want to write an essay here, so I’ll not get into the whole historically men have choices, women are basically property thing.
I feel like I could’ve worded that better, but you get the point.
marinerachel,
I’m not the greatest fan of Paul Elam but he wrote that article in response to this article in Jezebel http://jezebel.com/294383/have-you-ever-beat-up-a-boyfriend-cause-uh-we-have
It clearly shows the double standard of feminists when it comes to domestic violence. It deserved a sarcastic response. You do understand that by writing articles like that Jezebel doesn’t make it exactly difficult for people who want to argue that todays feminist movement is rife with double standards and misandry do you?
you do realise that spouting evo-pdyche bullshit is pathetic?
LOL. If it matters so much to you, Linda, go take it up with Jezebel. Stop wasting everyone’s time here, you silly troll.
Nathan,
Can you please provide me with links to back up your statistic? Please don’t confuse sexual assault with rape since sexual assault includes an unwelcomed pat on the back.
LOL!
So Linda is our AVFM talking points spouting troll for the day, I take it?
And JB is not the brightest crayon in the box, is she?
Oh dear…
Hey Linda? This is what you sound like with your first couple comments.
I hope you can see the problem here.
*boggles*
Did… did you actually read that thing?
Here’s the “offending” paragraph:
It was snark. Snark aimed at demonstrating the problem with the study the linked article used. They weren’t “beating the shit out of their boyfriends,” they shoved. And hit a phone out of a dude’s hands. And slapped a guy who was being offensive. And socking a guy who had just thrown someone’s laptop.
It was demonstrating the problem in the definition of “violence,” and pretending small acts like slapping or pushing are the same as “beating,” as well as the problem with the definition of “non-reciprocal,” where a violent act could be triggered by something like cheating or throwing a laptop but still count as “non-reciprocal.”
In response, we get a report about Paul Elam’s boner, and how he gets hard from thoughts of “fucking their shit up.” Nasty bit of work, that.
you do realise that spouting evo-pdyche bullshit is pathetic?
You do realize that evolutionary biology and evo-psyche is not the same thing? Sexual dimorphism is part of evolutionary biology. Please explain to me why men are larger, stronger and more muscular than women. Is it because of patriarchy and socialized gender roles or is it because of evolution? If you agree that it is because of evolution you must agree that men and women have faced different adaptive problems, being physically strong has simply been much more crucial for men in order to survive and reproduce than for females. If that was never the case the difference would not exist. Otherwise I would love to hear from you why men are the larger and physically stronger sex. Please give me your explanation.
And yet you are defending AVfM whilst accusing feminists of being clueless hypocrites. ..
It’s that time again! Place your bets for today’s edition of “name that sock”.
Oh good, another troll that does not understand evolutionary biology.
The fact that todays feminists deny sexual selection and sexual dimorphism in humans is the reason the disciplines of women’s and gender studies are all laughed at and scoffed at by scientists in the natural sciences.
Said no feminist ever.
Also…
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles/172837.pdf
And further…
INCORRECT! I’m taking a class on Evo-Psych this semester, as it’s likely Evo-Psych will have to be part of my studies on fanaticism.
Evo-Psych, or Evolutionary Psychology, is the synthesis of Evolutionary Biology and Psychology.
I don’t care whose sock it is, I just want to see it laundered. With lots of bleach.
And yeah, big brave men these guys are, hiding behind the skirts of women. Some of whom might just be female pseudonyms for themselves, by the smell of things.
Wow. Is Janet Bloomfield still under the impression that all publicity is good publicity?* It really, really, really isn’t. Taking a condescending attitude and claiming satire when called out on a horrible piece of writing is not working for Paul Elam, and it’s not working for her.
Again with the semantics. “Male tears” is not meant in earnest. Feminists are not against men crying; quite on the contrary, men bottling up their emotions (except rage) is part of the violent macho male image, which is not a feminist, but a conservative male ideal (see below).
As a pretty loose rule, “male tears” (or, sometimes, “man tears”) is used as a response to an entitled misogynist whining about his loss of privilege. One example of this could be “Men are not allowed to talk to women on the street without being called rapists or sexual harassers!” (translation: “My privilege to creep on and harass women and generally make them uncomfortable is more important than the right of women to feel safe in public spaces, and even though catcalling and the like are not illegal activities per se, you’re still being mean for pointing out that I’m acting like an asshole when I engage in said activities”).
Unlike “hysterical”, which is used in response to any emotion a woman may show at any given time, “male tears” is a counter to the entitled, ignorant rantings of misogynist asshats who take an unhealthy amount of pride in their male privilege.
Is the phrase provocative? I suppose. Should it be clearer? Not really. “Male” and “manly” are generally positive attributes in social discourse (just compare the blatantly positive “manly tears”), and assigning “male” as a prefix is not attacking the vulnerable. Men, as a group, are not belittled or silenced in our patriarchal society, so claiming it’s “just as bad” as MRAs talking about “female tears” is completely ignoring unequal social institutions, not to mention the implications of misogynists stating that they’re enjoying the misery of women.
Before any additional accusations of imagined institutional oppression (AKA misandry) are made: The macho ideal is not a form of institutional discrimination against men, but a result of the fucked-up social ideal of what a man is supposed to be. An ideal that, incidentally, seems to be what many MRAs embrace. Not that surprising, given that many of them identify as politically conservative. A man who does not fit into the traditional male role is not represented by the MRM. I’m always amused to read about MRAs conflicted about what to blame feminism for: the unhealthy, toxic macho male ideal, or the more modern, emotional, “wimpy” liberal male. It’s almost as if they can find a woman to blame for everything they think is wrong with society.
tl;dr: Assigning the “male” prefix to something is not belittling, since “male” is considered a positive quality in our patriarchal society.
*Here I would normally go off on a tangent about how the opportunistic and ego-centered qualities of the capitalist mindset destroys what little common sense an otherwise merely silly human being might have, but not today.
Lol, of course it does, Linda, and no one expects you to back up your ridonk assertions like an unwelcome pat on the back is sexual assault (it’s not – a slap on the ass or kiss or a grope of the breast or crotch and many far more overtly sexual acts that are unwanted do but great job dismissing the assaults of literally millions of people as unwelcome pats on the back – that’s EXACTLY what happened when I was fondled by my great uncle at eleven, you are so smart it kills me) with evidential support. That’s only the responsibility of those spoonfeeding you!
“Oh good, another troll that does not understand evolutionary biology.”
Well explain sexual dimorphism in humans for me then. Why are men larger and physically stronger than women. I’m eager to hear your explanation.
marinerachel
You are doing a disservice by conflating rape with sexual assault. those are not the same thing.
What the hell does sexual dimorphism have to do with JB libeling Jessica Valenti?
It’s fucking hilarious that here noone seems to be able to give an alternative explanation of sexual dimorphism in humans. I say it has to do with higher variance in reproductive succes and thus higher intrasexual competition in males. If you deny that, please offer me your scientific explanation? Is it because of socialized gender roles that men are more muscular?
You’d think it would be entertaining to watch someone having an argument with themselves, but sadly this does not appear to be the case,
The point is why does it fucking matter at all? We are humans. We have evolved to a point where we can ignore that shit. Because it has also been used to justify racism, thank you very much… and homophobia, and transphobia, and xenophobia, and so on.
The point is that maybe you should stop using evolutionary biology to justify inequality. You aren’t wrong about sexual dimorphism. You are wrong in your application of it and your insistence that it matters.
It doesn’t. Not for humans. Not anymore.
sparky
It hasn’t, but it sure as hell has a lot to do with whiny feminists whining about discrimination whenever there is any inequality of outcome. Equal outcome is not to be expected in a sexually dimorphic species.
Sexual assault, defined. You will notice that “unwelcomed pats on the back” do not figure ANYWHERE in that. Take all the time you need to read it closely, Linda.
Sexual dimorphism, partially explained. Although quite honestly, what this has to do with “sexism good, feminism eeeeeevil” is beyond me. Why so invested in it, Linda…do you have trouble opening pickle jars? Because if that’s all it is, then you should know that tapping the edge of the lid with the handle of a butter knife is usually enough to dislodge the seal.
Now fuck off, Linda. Or at least, invent a few fresh talking points instead of repeating the same old stale shit, eh?
that’s because we’re ignoring your unfounded claims, fool. Your ignorance of biology is so absurd that so far noone can be arsed to correct you.
@Linda:
Follow the links around in this forum. Not only do scientists in the natural sciences “not” scoff at the feminist conception of gender (notably not a denial of sexual selection or observed dimorphism), but they actually find evidence of a whole variety of weird and exciting things related to gender all across the animal kingdom.
There are butterflies that are half female, half male. Divided lengthwise. Left half male, right half female.
Non-scientists who assume the science agree with them scoff at feminists. Actual scientists continually find that gender is not simple, and continually find evidence justifying the feminist conception of gender, whether it is finding direct evidence of transsexual brain differences, or noting all the wacky and wonderful ways genotypes and phenotypes don’t simply down to “xx = female, xy = male.”
Do some dang research.
Dang, borked a link close. My commenting godhood has been removed. Maybe I shouldn’t have gotten that hair-cut.
Nathan,
I see that you have zero scientific arguments. So you do concede that scientifically I’m correct?
And no we haven’t evolved past that shit, it’s a ridiculous claim. Just open your eyes and look at the world and you will understand that we haven’t. The idea that we can socialize men into behaving like women and vice verse is as absurd as the idea that we can socialize homosexuals into becoming heterosexuals.
M