Jack Barnes, the notoriously hotheaded Men’s Rights Activist and longtime contributor to A Voice for Men, has escalated his attacks on me. In a post on AVFM, Barnes addressed me directly:
I’m a junkyard dog with no owner and no collar. …
Didn’t anyone ever tell you that you shouldn’t piss off a redheaded country boy from the backwoods of Tennessee? I promise you David that for the rest of your life there will be nights you cry yourself to sleep in anger and frustration over me.
In a followup post on TwitLonger, someone claiming to be Barnes — and it seems abundantly clear that it is in fact him — threatened to drive from Tennessee to Chicago to confront me in
a face to face in person discussion … No cops. No lawyers or prosecutors. No judges. No jury. No hiding behind a computer. Just me and you. …
I don’t know of any parent that would blame me for stomping a mud hole in your fucking ass and walking that motherfucker dry for what you have done!
What I have done is, in fact, nothing — nothing beyond letting the world know of some of the disturbing things Barnes has posted online.
But as Barnes sees it, I am responsible for putting his family in danger. How? Well, not long ago, someone apparently doxed Barnes, posting personal information about Barnes and his family on Twitter.
Of course, I had nothing to do with the doxing and only learned about it later from an AVFM video. I don’t know who did it, and I have publicly condemned it several times.
I will condemn it again, right here: the doxing of Jack Barnes and his family was wrong and a deeply shitty thing to do; whoever did it is a shithead and no friend of mine.
But Barnes is convinced one of my “cult followers” did the deed and bluntly warns me that ” I hold you personally responsible for this occurring.”
Even though I did not dox him, don’t know who doxed him, did not tell anyone to dox him, and have publicly denounced doxing in general and the doxing of Barnes and his family specifically.
The TwitLonger post declares:
You have crossed a line David. This is no longer about the MHRM vs feminism. This is no longer about AVFM, which I have no affiliation with, and your website. This is no longer about Paul Elam publisher of AVFM vs you as publisher of your website. You have made this personal. This is now about me vs you.
I don’t care that your little cult follower doxxed me. But when he/she doxxed my wife and little girl it became personal.
The author of the TwitLonger post, almost certainly Barnes himself, says that he will only come to Chicago for the promised “face to face in person discussion” if his family members come to harm.
But I do not have the luxury of seeing the threats as conditional ones. There are no conditions listed when he writes:
I don’t know of any parent that would blame me for stomping a mud hole in your fucking ass and walking that motherfucker dry for what you have done! Hell, I bet even Gondi would be like “he did what to you family? Fuck him up!
He is not saying that he would only be justified in “stomping a mud hole in [my] fucking ass” if something were to happen to his family; he is saying he is justified in doing so now.
Because some person who is not me, and who is unknown to me, did something I only found out about later and that I have publicly denounced.
And a possible “stomping” is not all I have to worry about: in his AVFM post, Barnes made sure I know that he
live[s] in a state with more guns than people, where a side arm is as common as a cell phone and where it is legal for 10yr olds to hunt with high powered rifles and without adult supervision.
So I can only assume that if he ever decides to pay me an unwanted visit he will be armed.
The author of the TwitLonger post — almost certainly Barnes — declares that his obvious threats against me are not in fact threats but “simply a statement of fact.” I think any reasonable person reading these posts would see them as clear threats, and I am treating them as such.
And it is plainly obvious to me that Barnes intends to terrorize me into silence with his threats — as his “promise” on AVFM that “for the rest of your life there will be nights you cry yourself to sleep” thinking about him makes abundantly clear. His threats are consistent with the threatening language he uses against feminists online, particularly on Twitter, which are clearly intended to shut his opponents up. As he put it in one notorious Tweet
https://twitter.com/Jackbarnesmra/status/559761561028669440
Adding to the surreality of this all, Barnes and his allies at A Voice for Men are so committed to their bizarre caricature of me as some kind of cartoon supervillain that they not only blame me for things I haven’t done but for not doing things that I have done. In this case, their eyes seem to have blurred over when they’ve come across the things I’ve written condemning the doxing.
In his AVFM post, Barnes wrote that while other feminists had denounced the doxing,
there was one person who has remain eerily silent about all this. That person is David Futrelle. Seems odd since all of this doxxing was done to avenge him. There is not a peep from Futrelle about this on his site or on social media anywhere that I could find. As a parent I know my kid is up to no good when she is quiet. Wonder if the same goes for adults (assuming the word applies)?
In fact, I had condemned the doxing two days earlier in a post that Barnes has publicly acknowledged reading.
On Twitter, AVFM’s “Chief Public Relations Officer” Suzy McCarley did Barnes one better, somehow managing to miss my denunciation of the doxing in a Tweet of mine that she was literally quoting at the time, leading to this rather surrealistic exchange:
It is almost as if they are so committed to seeing me as a monster that they cannot handle it when reality defies their expectations.
Another longtime AVFM supporter, so-called “Honey Badger” Hannah Wallen, has added a decidely Kafkaesque series of Tweets to the Twitter dogpile, including one that puzzled me greatly until she explained her “logic” in more detail:
Reading "If you X, I'll Y" as "I'm gonna Y!" = admitting to planning X. What have you planned to do, doxing Dave? https://t.co/93hT4Dlsaj
— Hannah Wallen | Professional Smartass (@Oneiorosgrip) November 9, 2015
Eventually, I was able to understand that she was taking my concern over Barnes’ threats … as proof that I was planning to harm his family.
She explained her “logic” in a blog post I discovered later. Utterly ignoring my denunciations of the doxing, and of doxing in general, she declared that if i didn’t immediately “admit”that my worries about Barnes’ threats were “a completely irrational overreaction to being held responsible for the effects of his dishonest shit stirring on his followers” I was essentially admitting that I was planning some sort of attack on Barnes’ family:
[H]is current response indicates .. that he intends for harm to come Jack’s family as a result of his shit stirring, that he DOES encourage his readers to engage in this type of behavior, and that he DOES intend for one or more of his readers to respond to his writing by engaging in violence against HIS political opponents.
After all, “If X, then Y” only infers Y on the condition of X… so responding to “If you X, then I’ll Y” as if the individual has only stated “I’m going to Y” is an admission that you’ve planned on X happening.
This, I have to admit, is pretty ingenious. Kafka would be proud.
But just in case anyone thinks there is anything to Wallen’s sophistry: I do not support doxing in general, and have made this clear on numerous occasions. I did not, do not, will not support the doxing of Jack Barnes or his family, nor do I have the slightest idea who did it. I do not “intend … for harm to come [to] Jack’s family” or to him. (Indeed, I don’t even know where they live; not only did I have nothing to do with the doxing of Barnes and his family, I didn’t even know about it until after the doxing tweets were deleted.) I do not support violence against my political opponents.
All of this is obvious to anyone who actually reads what I write on this blog without their perceptions distorted by MRA-induced prejudice or preconceptions.
That said, I will not apologize for taking Barnes’ threats seriously.
Nor will I apologize for exposing misogynistic Men’s Rights activists to the light of day — not by “shit stirring” or engaging in Wallen-esque sophistry, but by quoting their own words and reporting their real deeds.
And when people harass and threaten me — whether that’s Barnes, those at AVFM who have aided and abetted his threats, or anyone else — I will take every legal step I feel is necessary for my safety and the safety of others.
This post is one of those steps.
I stand with you, David. You are doing a great job of holding a mirror up to show the world how disgusting the MRM really is. Oh, and sharing some great cat pictures. 🙂 Please stay safe, physically and mentally.
I will never stop saying I am a feminist. Mr. Barnes is the living embodiment of why I will never be silent.
I really feel for Mr. Barnes family. No one deserves to be doxxed. I hope all of them stay safe as well.
What an angry, unbalanced fellow.
Stay safe, David.
-Mathieu T., always an ally
sagamanus —
“And if he actually has the temerity to meet you face to face that will prove how unstable these wackjobs really are.”
Please don’t do that, I know what you mean, and why you said it, but it’s ableist, they’re suffering a serious empathy deficit for sure, but they’re not whack jobs.
“What is the penalty for him traveling that far for the purposes of physically harming someone?”
Idk the penalty, but the moment it crosses state lines it’s federal. That’s how things like crossing state lines to ensure a minor can access abortion services is illegal (I think it still isn’t? Or did that get amended finally?) But what the feds have jurisdiction over is how pot can be legal in a state, but still totally illegal if a fed decides to arrest you. We have weird borders on who has jurisdiction over what, but crossing state lines to commit a crime is a federal affair.
Now if they’d only wise up to internet threats inherently crossing state lines!
I’m a long-time lurker and daily reader of your blog, David. And I’m de-lurking simply to add my support for you.
I don’t know why these people would want to live in the world they are so intent on creating. Where conflict, harassment, lies, bullying, and obfuscation is the standard operating procedure and demeaning and dehumanizing others is considered acceptable behavior. And some are parents? Why would anyone want to create this world for their children? It’s depressing. So much unhappiness and aggression. Do they ever question their worldview?
This accusation is obviously an attempt to get you to shut up and derail you from your good work, but it must be awful to be deal with. Stay strong, you have my respect and gratitude. I hope you are getting all the support you need and haven’t run out of laughs.
And I enjoy your commentary, regular commenters!
Now back to silence.
Mari
(Yes, a feminist)
(Hail, Katie!)
(Shut up Woody)
Good thoughts and wishes to you, David. 🙂
You know, he has to protect his wife and daughter. Just like he protects his other property.
I don’t know who or what he is protecting them from, but it isn’t anyone here.
And, I am in the south, where the gun culture is bigger than jesus. It’s my observation that the people that most want to own guns are the very people that shouldn’t have them. People that love guns like this don’t ever own A gun, they always have tons of them.
And they want everyone to know how many guns they have, how they aren’t afraid to use them, and they are such tough bad asses.
In other words, if you have a gun owner with a big mouth, he is way less likely to hurt someone than the guy who is secretly keeping weapons hidden.
And, I am pretty sure barnes isn’t smart enough to actually find his way to Chicago from Tennessee. That takes a minimal amount of intellect that he seems to NOT possess.
Yes, Jack Barnes is a terrorist.
Jack, Jack, Jack: I’m still a feminist and very happy to be one.
Suzy McCarley: Yep, still a feminist, still happy about that.
David, I’m glad you’re taking all appropriate steps to stay safe. Thank you for your heroism.
“they’re suffering a serious empathy deficit for sure, but they’re not whack jobs.”
Really? Some of these dudes actually believes in zombifying vaginal goo!
I know that the term is often being abused over strong disagreement but when it comes to the “manosphere” there is such a thing as compelling evidence.
Stay safe, David!
Forgive me if this theory has been advanced already, but is it possible that he (or they at the Misogynists’ Rights Movement) faked this doxxing so as to FYSU? Back in the days before the Internet, someone at my school put up nasty, threatening flyers against the club they created, so as to get pity, receive extra attention from the University, and to help bring down their perceived enemy club on campus.
Were it not for campus security cameras no one would have ever guessed it was an inside job with ulterior motives. Regardless, David, I am with you, WE are with you, and we hope like hell this decelerates SOON. Upgrade your security, friend, just in case these dishonest shit-monkeys do what dishonest shit-monkeys do.
There’s a certain whiff of bullshit around this, but I’m really wary of calling false flag without actual evidence. You aren’t the only one questioning it, and it does fit their MO, but I feel like saying it didn’t happen is a step too far given what we have for evidence.
I’m heading off, both cuz it’s late, and cuz I’m all over the place in this thread and not David. It’s his thread, and I’m sorry I’m allowing my desire to answer questions clog it. G’night guys, take care!
Joining in, seeing the sheer number of people who are subjected to assholes like Jack Barnes and constant double standards merely because of their gender is the only reason I’ll ever need to call myself a feminist.
Also, can we discuss just how fucking hard this asshole is trying to look like Heisenberg in that picture? Sorry dude, maybe if you stood in a shirt and some tighty wighties you might look scarier.
@wwth
It’s exasperating how often these idiots resort to “Hey, these people we don’t like keep calling us X, let’s call them X, that will show them!”
I also think it’s a tactic that only works on the internet, if you try that tactic anywhere in the real world outside the kindergarden playground, you’d just get called out immediately.
This Jack Barnes guy is a coward. He accuses you of hiding behind a computer, when that’s all he’s doing. I wouldn’t worry about him coming after you. He won’t do anything but continue to harass people online, while crying about you calling him out on his BS. That’s all he’s capable of doing.
Hey! Full grown up man here. I fully support feminists for an equal world and I fully support David against this pitiful excuse of human beings know as Jack Barnes, Suzy McCarley and the sad sacks of secular stupidity at AVFREDPUA.
I hope that any legal actions you take against Barnes will result in a quick settlement in your favor. I think by acting like this after being himself the victim of harassment through doxxing (oh the irony!), he is merely trying to save is face in the most vile manner possible.No schadenfreude here, but that says a lot about the hypocrisy and the lies of redpillers and the sort. Not to mention their illiteracy (hi Suzy McCarley)…
Wouldn’t most none criminal types work on remaining safe and involving law enforcement if they thought the threat from the alleged dox was real rather than erupting in threats? To me, this story reeks of bs. Stay strong, Dave.
David, I support you but you have readers that are more familiar to you whose support means more, and, I suspect, you might even have a freind or two. Some I’m going to move on from supporting you to do what I do best: crush idiocy.
No. “If X then Y” doesn’t infer Y at all. It will never infer Y. You have to have a mind to “infer” something and electronically stored glyphs have no mind at all – not even one with an atrophied, neurologically deficient left lateral sulcus, like one “Honey Badger” Hannah Wallen.
Now, If X, then Y only entails Y on the condition X, but much more problematic for Wallen, If X then Y implies Y on the condition X and on other, unspecified conditions, otherwise the appropriate phrase would be “If and only if X, then Y”.
“If you can’t language, don’t criticize others’ language and if you can’t logic, don’t criticize others’ logic,” is, sadly, far too difficult for Wallen to grasp.
I hope Cassie Jaye is paying attention to this display by the “movement” she is studying and funded by.
Additionally, if the statement is a human being’s promise of what they’re going to do, then the statement effectively means “If I believe X has happened, then Y.”
If that person has a history of mistaking and misinterpreting things (or flat-out lying about them), then the only rational response is to assume that Y might happen at any time with or without provocation.
All the best, David. I have a lot of respect for your work and for your courage in standing up to these deeply unpleasant individuals. Keep going and ignore these no doubt empty threats from Barnes.
This is insane – I really hope you’re letting the authorities know about this man. He is way over the line for specific threats: he mentions weapon, intent, and location. I hope twitter knows that Barnes is doing this to people, too – they ban for that. Some of his unhinged ramblings read like John Russell Houser.
Please stay safe.
Thank you for all you do David.
These guys are out of control and you really put yourself out there for the cause; come what may.
I imagine some days it must be very easy to consider packing it all in, as it must be so draining dealing with these unhinged cretins on a daily basis.
From the bottom of my big feminist heart…thank you! 🙂
Aside from that, even assuming that Jack Barnes did indeed mean that “if and only if my family actually comes to harm will I make good on my threats”, David taking the threats seriously does not mean he intends harm to anyone. Because DAVID IS NOT THE ONLY PERSON IN THE WORLD, and does not control anyone’s actions but his own.
It’s like saying “if it rains this wednesday, I will punch you in the face” and then claiming that the person being threatened clearly has weather-controlling abilities and intended to maliciously cause rain to fall on wednesday, because they felt threated by the statement. Someone finding Y to be a credible threat when hearing “If X then Y” only means they intend to do X if X is something they and only they can choose to do.
Aside from that, I’m reasonably sure that a threat is a threat, period, whether it’s attached to a conditional statement or not.
Also, I’m sorry you’re dealing with this, David. I offer you my support and hope that you stay safe through all of this.
From your post, Barnes says this:
“there was one person who has remain eerily silent about all this. That person is David Futrelle. Seems odd since all of this doxxing was done to avenge him. There is not a peep from Futrelle about this on his site or on social media anywhere that I could find. As a parent I know my kid is up to no good when she is quiet. Wonder if the same goes for adults (assuming the word applies)?”
—
But..If he really believes you were the one doxxing him then why should you talk about it in a post? I know you don’t support doxxing but, it’s like Barnes can’t figure out if you were the one doing the doxxing or not since he wants you to talk about it and distance yourself from it. So he wants you to distance yourself from your own alleged doxxing tactic..? How does that even make sense in his own head, I don’t understand.
Also, I read the archived copy. In it he again talks about how he wants to destroy feminism. Haha. It’s kind of cute that he thinks he has the skill to do that.
Also, in that TwitLonger he claims:
“This is no longer about AVFM, which I have no affiliation with, and your website”.
——-
So. He claims to not be affiliated with AVFM while having written a post on AVFM about this doxxing? Wat.
It’s interesting that he accuses you and your followers to have done something he has no proof of doing. Is he making false accusations, oh I think so. For all I know he did it himself just to create drama and portray himself as a poor victim.