Janet Bloomfield — the slur-spewing A Voice for Men “social media director” better known as JudgyBitch — has launched a rather unique fundraiser on Patreon: In addition to funds to spend on better videomaking equipment, she’s asking her supporters to send her $800 for a crossbow so she can “shoot the feminists in the face.”
JB isn’t joking; she’s an avid bowhunter, and she has her crossbow all picked out.
Of course JB claims that the weapon will only be used in self-defense, in case some angry feminist shows up at her door with an axe or something. But in the video above, posted to her Patreon page, she describes her fantasy of using it to maim or kill a feminist in detail, and with great relish.
She starts waxing poetic about what she calls the “angel of death crossbow” at 8:32 in the video above. Here are some of the highlights.
In this first clip, she describes what she would do to any “little brave feminist” who showed up at her door unarmed but seeking a confrontation.
The tl;dr? She would shoot them in the gut with her crossbow, dead center, in an attempt to sever their spine and leave them paralyzed. “You’re gonna drop,” she says, “and you’re never getting back up again.”
As for those who show up at her door with “a hammer, an axe, a knife, a gun” or other weapon, she promises to shoot them dead without warning. “I would love to do it with that beautiful angel of death crossbow,” she says, with a certain manic glee. “Let’s buy Janet a crossbow so she can shoot the feminists in the face!”
MRAs, male and female, seem to spend an awful lot of time and energy fantasizing about doing great harm to their opponents. But this is the first time I’ve seen one actually set up a Patreon fundraiser so they can buy a deadly weapon.
H/T — @TakedownMRAs
I don’t think the post I was talking about was referring to people you were already friends with, or family in Flint’s case, but rather strangers you were interacting with for the first time, hence the “possible worthwhile friendship” bit.
It was pretty much similar to the rants we had on here about “Why are you all so mean to me?! I contribute to the discussion! Why aren’t you focusing on that instead of calling me out for shitty behavior!”
And there it is. Well said.
Serious suggestion: How about we write a boilerplate response to first-time ableist remarks by new posters? It can be something we all agree is clear but not overly harsh, and it can link to the comment policy. That way anyone feeling short-tempered will be less likely to respond angrily, and subsequent posters will feel less need to add their own responses because the thing we’ve all agreed to say has already been said.
There’s a very simple answer to all this discussion about ableism as Al Murray’s Pub Landlord would easily explain:
http://stagevu.com/img/thumbnail/bmrxooplgjxabig.jpg
katz: Once David has clarified the rules in the actual commenting policy, i’d suggest the following:
No explanations or arguments–those will be at the link. No invective; that can be reserved for those who double-down. If folks get ninja’ed, then if folks want they can simply note they were ninja’ed and we can move on.
If they double-down, of course, we give them to pandapool with a choice of condiments.
(Obviously, I kid. The sorts of people who do this sort of thing are far too gamey to be eaten.)
Why do people think I am good at tearing people up when Paradoxical is the best and baddest of us all?
Is it because I’m a panda and she’s a
frogcontradiction? Or is she such a baddest contradiction you have to put me up instead because the paradoxicalness of it all?Pandapool: I was going for avocation rather than aptitude. PI may be better at it, but you certainly seem to enjoy it more. @_~
@Paradoxical
Every troll-tearing post you do, I’m like
http://ih1.redbubble.net/image.41428005.7390/flat,800×800,075,f.jpg
Just my two cents, but I think it might also be a good idea to link to some of the material in the welcome package, and include some sort of strongly worded warning not to double down.
Maybe something along the lines of
“Please read the linked material and do not respond with any defense of your language.”
Anyway, that might not be quite right, but it would be nice to try to head off some of the doubling down that often follows requests when they are too polite.
You know, I was going to find a gif of that “It’s a paradox you moron, there is no answer!” line from Portal 2, and I was re-watching some of the Wheatley bits, and I came to the realization that he sounds an awful lot like an MRA.
[SPOILERS]
Specifically in that scene after Chell replaces GLaDOS with him.
And of course, the fact of the matter is Chell carried him around everywhere while he gave the occasional hint as to what Chell needed to do, and she had hoped to get her freedom after she put Wheatley in charge. Chell did all of the heavy lifting to get them to where they were. She did all the work, as GLaDOS said.
[/SPOILERS]
I’m fine with a simple copy pasta for first offenders if
1) there is no tone policing or whining about boredom with regards to the way we deal with repeat offenders.
2) this only applies to the newbies who make a relatively innocuous post. Not anyone who claims to be a mental health professional, as they should really know better. Not anyone who makes a particularly horrible comment, like using the r word or saying that somebody should be forcibly locked away. Not obvious trolls.
3) If this is something we agree on eventually, people should recognize that it will take time for the news to filter down to all the sporadic posters. My only real concern with a policy designed to be a little more patient with new posters who don’t know the community standards is that this could be used to constantly troll police regulars. I’d hate to see the people who pop up from time to time to scold us about being mean to ableist posters look for and take any excuse to excessively tone police everyone.
Aw, format fail. I forgot that blockquotes automagically italicize everything.
JACKIE I GOOGLED THAT PHRASE AND WHY WOULD YOU SAY THAT?!
I second this. I don’t want this to be used as an out for anyone looking to straight up be an asshole.
@Paradoxical
Well, I said it as a joke, but I’m confused on whether you’re truly shocked or not.
Also I’m an asshole, as established. An asshole who likes to snark and do video game references.
I’ve noticed quite a few people have come out of lurkerdom to say how much they appreciate that regulars here speak out against casual ableism and how it makes them feel like this is a safer space than most for those with mental illness.
I have a question for those who think we dogpile on ableist comments too much. Are the comfort, well being and feelings of these posters, most of whom are likely either not mentally ill at all or have mental ill issues that are mild enough to not be deemed crazy very often (I’d include myself in this group) more important than the comfort, well being and feelings of either the people with mental illness who are fighting constantly to make the space safer for those with mental illness or for those lurkers or regulars who are not up for the fight but benefit those efforts? If so, why?
It just seems like we’re being asked to prioritize a privileged group over an oppressed group. To me, that’s a big intersectionality fail and pretty equivalent to the people who like to do the “what about the menz?” derails.
Ugh. I guess I’m tired, because I see a lot of weird little errors in my posts. Hopefully the gist is still clear.
I don’t have a dog in this particular fight but I think it’s nice that there’s at least one place that people who are hurt by those words can hang around and know that such words won’t be casually tossed around.
For people who do like to use those words in a colloquial sense then there’s a space for them too; it’s called ‘everywhere else’.
Naturally. The goal is that we have a standard way of dealing with this stuff so no one will have a reason to drop thread filibusters about how we deal with this stuff. Anyone who does will obviously be themselves the derailer.
Another lurker-ish poster chiming in: the comments sections of We Hunted The Mammoth are among the only ones I’ve ever felt safe/healthy reading. A bit part of that is the strict policing of casual ableism.
…
That’s all. Those that contribute to the safety of this space for the mentally divergent have my sincerest thanks.
As a recent delurker I’ve been a little hesitant about posting in this thread, but I do want to contribute my thanks to those who push back against ableism. I learned about it lurking here, at a time when I was beginning to struggle with mental health issues myself. It was incredibly comforting to realise that there were people actively fighting to reduce stigma, and that was part of what kept me reading here. Thank you.
I read this post just now and oh boy is it relevant to the subject at hand.
https://feministaspie.wordpress.com/2015/07/18/the-illusion-of-neutral/
To be clear, dogpiling doesn’t only occur when ableist comments are made. For example, I saw it happen when someone with a quirky way of communicating raised suspicion even though he said nothing objectionable. It still bothers me that he slunk away wounded. (IIRC, his name was Jared.) I was dogpiled, it wasn’t about ableism, and it was very hurtful. There are lots of situations where dogpiling occurs (obvious trolls excluded) yet every time someone complains about it, the resulting invective is too defensive and too aggressive. It’s been like that for years.
To answer the question, I disagree with the assumption that people who complain about dogpiling are not mentally ill. Being dogpiled feels like group rejection and it’s worse for those of us who are depressed, anxious, or have low self-esteem. Don’t you think that makes people feel at least as unsafe as being exposed to ableism?
I’m not defending ableism AT ALL and don’t appreciate having my opinions written off as that.