Categories
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

Lying as PR: AVFM's Janet Bloomfield libels Jessica Valenti — then brags about it

Janet Bloomfield, self-acknowledged liar
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.]jbfakequotesTwitter

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:

https://twitter.com/JessicaValenti/status/495559012449267713

https://twitter.com/JessicaValenti/status/495559068841680896

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:

So when Jess posted that picture, I needed to goad her into replying to me directly so I wouldn’t violate Twitter’s spamming rules. I used Poe’s Law to attribute a few false but utterly plausible quotes to her, and sure enough, she replied.     Jess is not terribly smart.     Now Twitter is a little outraged at Jess’ callous indifference to the suffering of men and boys and she is catching a bit of hell. Predictably, she is having a big victim party and sulking.  It was just a joke, after all.

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:

Jess is not having a good day, and it looks like it will be getting worse before it gets better.     Much worse.     Awwww. Too bad, Jess. Sucks to be a grown-up and have to own your shit, doesn’t it?

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.

 

470 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Linda Wong
Linda Wong
10 years ago

maistrechat

You have yet to demonstrate that phatriarchy has anything to do with anything at all. At this point you’re just throwing out a non-sequitur.

Actually I have provided scientific links if you bothered to read them.

bunnybunny
bunnybunny
10 years ago

“The fact that there are men who are not competitive, do not like to take risks, and don’t choose to try and attain positions of status and dominance shows us that it is NOT a biological imperative.”

This is as scientifically sound as saying that the fact that there are women with beard, deep voices and who are 6 feet tall shows us that those secondary sex characteristics are not a biological imperative.

Holy non sequitur, Linda, what has science done to you to deserve this egregious misrepresentation?

Omnicrom
Omnicrom
10 years ago

No it isn’t Linda Wong. You have been arguing that men are INHERENTLY more competitive and desire to be dominant. Women do not grow beards without a significantly higher than standard amount of Testosterone. Men do not need to alter their biological chemistry to be something besides a driven Type A personality.

Also considering we live in a society where transexuality exists (and should indeed be encouraged) I say that no, secondary sex characteristics are no longer a biological imperative.

Linda Wong
Linda Wong
10 years ago

LLLOLLLLLLL!!!!

“Biological sex is a social construct, so any research on sexual dimorphism is pretty much doomed to be inaccurate and methodologically bankrupt. You haven’t proven shit.”

You guys really enjoy living in la-la land don’t you?

Ally S
10 years ago

When will you ever stop denying reality?

When will you stop uncritically accepting the discursive conditioning that leads you to believe that sexual dimorphism is a thing?

marinerachel
marinerachel
10 years ago

You are aware that you’re assuming physical characteristics are responsible for behaviours you presume inherent in les menz?

I watch animals fuck all day. You’re using a simplified understanding to validate gender roles, not biology. Varied reproductive success can result in intrasexual competition. You got it. Size and strength can be the result of intrasexual competition. Absolutely. So can a million other things. The fact you can’t fathom all the other reasons for sexual dimorphism is on you, buddy. I did a degree is evolutionary biology and ethology already. I’m guessing with relatively high certainty you got yours from UofGoogle.

Now tell us more about how masturbating a child is akin to an unwanted pat on the back because it’s not forced penetration on anyone’s end.

kirbywarp
kirbywarp
10 years ago

@Linda:

LOL!! So i guess that’s the reason why female athletes and bodybuilders take testosterone to increase their muscle mass, and socialized gender roles is the reason why the olympics are sexually segregated.

Testosterone is a chemical. It doesn’t have a gender. The olympics are sexually segregated because society decided it should be that way. Partly because they want to include athletes who’s religion prohibits mixing genders, partly because of the society-driven view that women are weaker.

Well, there are weak men and strong women. Why not segregate by ability, and just let the chips fall where they may?

Are you really trying to argue that the olympics, a completely socially-constructed enterprise, is proof of something other than social constructions around gender?

cassandrakitty
cassandrakitty
10 years ago

So far today we have learned that Linda hates feminists, logic, science, and the English language. What’s next in her campaign of terror against all of the things?

I’m voting “cats”.

Omnicrom
Omnicrom
10 years ago

Well now I KNOW you aren’t arguing in good faith when you start tilting straw men. I mean you never were when you came in with the disingenuous “MRAs and Feminists suck, PS MRAs are awesome and I’m totally not an MRA”, but thank you for putting words in my mouth and proving it all over again.

maistrechat
10 years ago
Reply to  Linda Wong

Linda, maybe you should do some research on the Bonobos, the species that is the closest to humans. Virtually nothing you are saying is relevent to the points you are trying to make.

Ally S
10 years ago

LLLOLLLLLLL!!!!

“Biological sex is a social construct, so any research on sexual dimorphism is pretty much doomed to be inaccurate and methodologically bankrupt. You haven’t proven shit.”

You guys really enjoy living in la-la land don’t you?

It’s not my fault that you don’t understand how science is discursively constructed. You’re a fucking idiot and you assume you know everything just because you’re able to spew all kinds of scientific factoids.

I don’t live in la-la land. I live in a world – and so do you and everyone else – in which science isn’t a pure method of inquirty but rather one influenced and determined wholly by various discourses. You really don’t seem to understand even the scientific method well with your naive, idiotic denial of how science is shaped by discourse. Try again, sweetie.

kirbywarp
kirbywarp
10 years ago

I wonder when Linda will stop hir scattergun approach to a gish gallop and actually address anything I’ve said? I’ve even provided science!

Johanna Roberts
10 years ago

Oh wow, looks like there’s an evolutionary psych/biology troll on here who doesn’t have two braincells to rub together to get the neurons firing. Sad, but nothing can be done to save the chronically blind to reality. That being said, holy shit I hope this lady gets brought up on charges. That’s just scummy as hell.

eseldmorwenna
10 years ago

Most people who rely on spouting irrelevant scientific “facts” don’t understand the philosophy of science. Or philosophy. Or science.

bunnybunny
bunnybunny
10 years ago

So far today we have learned that Linda hates feminists, logic, science, and the English language. What’s next in her campaign of terror against all of the things?

The sea. Space. Ceratioid anglerfish.

Linda Wong
Linda Wong
10 years ago

maistrechat

You do know that bonobos are highly gendered in their behaviour? You do realize that among bonobos male care of infants is practically non existent?

Ally S
10 years ago

Again, Linda, what are your thoughts on transgender people?

Linda Wong
Linda Wong
10 years ago

Please do continue Ally S, it’s entertaining to read you delusional fantasies. Reality hurts too much doesn’t it?

Omnicrom
Omnicrom
10 years ago

Did I ever say Testosterone didn’t have an effect on brain chemistry? I’m merely chorusing what everyone has said, that your bugaboo of sexual dimorphism isn’t enough to justify strict gender roles seen in most societies.

titianblue
titianblue
10 years ago

Oh good, Linda Wrong has gone for the ableism and personal attacts. Mod, clean up on aisle 5!

redpoppy
redpoppy
10 years ago

*de-lurks* My goodness, Linda is tiring. My eyes are aching from all the rolling. Do yourself a favor and listen to what the people here are telling you. There is enormous human diversity. This diversity manifests not just in ethnic groups, but in gender as well. Aside from the obvious example of super tall women and super short men, gender diversity and expression in and of itself is practically limitless. I get that looking at pop culture images of SUPER LARGE MANLY MAN and tiny dainty flower woman can make someone think this is the norm. It is far from the norm.

Linda Wong
Linda Wong
10 years ago

kirbywarp

“Follow the links around in this forum. Not only do scientists in the natural sciences “not” scoff at the feminist conception of gender ”

Read this chapter if you want to see what prominent scientist do think about gender studies and the like

http://www.pasadena.edu/files/syllabi/txcave_18360.pdf

I have better things to do now, but it was fun to argue with delusional people like you. Keep on denying reality if it makes you feel better about yourselves. But please don’t try to force your fantasies and delusions upon society as a whole.

Goodbye! 🙂

cassandrakitty
cassandrakitty
10 years ago

I predict meltdown rather soon.

sparky
sparky
10 years ago

Howard Bannister:

Also, see the first comment on this thread, which wasn’t visible initially.

She really does think there is no such thing as bad press.

Really.

I know, right? I do not get this at all. It’s like, doesn’t JB remember that time when Rush Limbaugh said some stupider and more offensive than usual things and all his sponsors pulled their support? Not that JB and AVFM have sponsors beyond their readers; but still, if you’re part if a “human rights movement” you’d think you wouldn’t want your press to be all about how you libel people and call them wh*res.

1 3 4 5 6 7 19