Categories
alt-right andrea hardie doxing empathy deficit entitled babies FemRAs hate hate speech homophobia hypocrisy irony alert Islamophobia judgybitch literal nazis misogyny MRA racism threats

Andrea “JudgyBitch” Hardie attacks Beyonce fans as “feral animals,” threatens murder

Andrea Hardie attempts blackface
Andrea Hardie attempts blackface. No, really. This literally is her attempt at blackface.

Not-so-nice white lady Andrea Hardie — perhaps better known on the internet as Janet Bloomfield and/or JudgyBitch — is still ostensibly the Social Media Director of the fading Men’s Rights hate site A Voice for Men.

But with AVFM no longer grabbing the headlines it once, if briefly, did, the attention-seeking Canadian has apparently decided to hitch herself to the hate movement that’s really going places these days — the so-called alt-right, a loose collection of white supremacists, anime Nazis, and cuck-clucking Trump fans who enjoy trolling Twitter with hateful garbage as much as Hardie herself does.

Her latest publicity stunt? An almost gleefully racist Twitter tirade against Beyoncé and her fans as “feral animals” and “thugs.” As the singer’s fans took to Twitter to celebrate the premiere of Bey’s “visual album” LEMONADE, Hardie jumped into the fray with Tweets designed to offend:

UPDATE: Hardie’s Twitter account has evidently been suspended; I will replace the missing tweets with screenshots when I get a minute. Luckily the text remains: 

https://twitter.com/andreahardie/status/724329005671915522

https://twitter.com/AndreaHardie/status/724324980088049668

https://twitter.com/AndreaHardie/status/724334061645340672

https://twitter.com/AndreaHardie/status/724375495152939008

When one Puerto Rican woman took offense at her not-very-well-disguised racist language, Hardie cranked the racism up further:

https://twitter.com/AndreaHardie/status/724340834825605120

Hardie followed up her Twitter tirade with a blog post titled, with her characteristic subtlety, “Beyoncé fans are feral thugs, like her.” In it, Hardie managed to find an excuse to use the word “feral” five times, “thugs” and “thuggish” six times, and “animals” four times. Here she manages to use all three in once sentence:

What I am saying is that #BlackLivesMatter thugs can scream to high heaven they are just frustrated victims of racism, but their actions are those of feral, wild animals.

Beyoncé’s recent, Black-Panther-referencing, Super Bowl performance was “an attack on the police officers of America,” Hardie sniffs. LEMONADE is worse, a sign that Beyoncé has fully “embrace[d] the violent thuggery of #BlackLivesMatter.” And while Beyoncé’s music and music videos won’t

cause anyone to go out and shoot an officer … these thugs are already so inclined, and it sure does provide a nice musical background!

In her blog post, Hardie makes much of the fact that that some women responded to her racist Tweets with threatening language. “When I tweeted to the hashtag #Lemonade asking why Beyoncé was embracing such ugly stereotypes about Black women as feral,” Hardie writes, “a legion of her fans showed up to prove they weren’t feral at all! Good job, ladies!”

Hardie posts screenshots of Tweets in which women offended by her Tweets tell her to “shut up, bitch” and “die slow.” One women, whose account seems to have since been banned, threatens to “slice [her] like a f**ing cheesecake” as well as to do some exceptionally disturbing things to, and with, the penis of Hardie’s father.

While acknowledging that when people on Twitter threaten her, she “threaten[s] them right back,” Hardie for some reason neglects to post screenshots of any of her responses. Here are several of them, which may strike you as a tad feral, animalistic and thuggish themselves.

https://twitter.com/AndreaHardie/status/724361512337477632

https://twitter.com/AndreaHardie/status/724360995364323328

As it turns out, Hardie is something of an old hand at threatening Twitter foes with gruesome violence. Apparently she regularly fantasizes about flaying off the skin of her enemies, gouging out their eyes, and/or bolting their heads to cars and doors. Among other things.

https://twitter.com/AndreaHardie/status/704798765140434945

https://twitter.com/AndreaHardie/status/722851057701941248

https://twitter.com/AndreaHardie/status/721528401941671938

https://twitter.com/AndreaHardie/status/724351278596370433

https://twitter.com/AndreaHardie/status/724062581242126337

https://twitter.com/AndreaHardie/status/720640534520471554

In the interest of keeping this a SFW blog, I will refrain from posting a Tweet in which Hardie pulls out the c-word before threatening to “gouge out [the] eyes” of a woman before stuffing them up her posterior.

I will also refrain from posting a Tweet in which Hardie told another Twitter foe how much she would enjoy “bolting your head to the roof of my car” because Hardie, who regularly affects great concern over being doxxed, included what I presume is her home address in the Tweet.

There are more examples, many more. And she is not shy about threatening people off of Twitter either.

But I think the point is fairly clear. If we were to judge all white women by the Twitter timeline of Andrea Hardie, we would have to conclude that they are feral, animalistic thugs — with a rather vivid imagination when it comes to imagining how they might torture, kill and dismember their foes.

Despite her penchant for floridly violent threats, Hardie — the wife of a Canadian academic — has so far refrained from explicit racial slurs, at least on Twitter.

And while she has occasionally dropped the alt-right buzzword “cuck” — once when referring to me — she hasn’t taken up another alt-right favorite, the racist slur “dindu.” She seems content, at least for now, to stick with racial-slur-substitutes like “feral” and “thug.”

She feels no such compunction about using the word “faggot,” which she trollishly pretends is not the slur that it is.

https://twitter.com/AndreaHardie/status/725002783624183810

https://twitter.com/AndreaHardie/status/724980252338995200

https://twitter.com/AndreaHardie/status/724974614141612032

https://twitter.com/AndreaHardie/status/724779983906963457

And these are just from the past 24 hours. I left out the worst one, a crudely sexual bag of insults directed at the excellent @TakedownMRAs

Hardie, while perhaps not the credit to her race that she evidently thinks she is, continues to celebrate (as she has been doing for some time) what she sees as the superiority of “white culture,” or at least the more traditionalist aspects of it.

https://twitter.com/AndreaHardie/status/724936997530427393

https://twitter.com/AndreaHardie/status/720230125896404992

As that last Tweet suggests, Hardie not only apes the rhetoric and the obsessions of the alt-right; she has begun to embrace the label as well.

https://twitter.com/AndreaHardie/status/720341351557046279

https://twitter.com/AndreaHardie/status/720371775650074625

https://twitter.com/AndreaHardie/status/721874795642626048

https://twitter.com/AndreaHardie/status/724424450897268737

https://twitter.com/AndreaHardie/status/720368776580087808

And then today, this rather inept attempt at blackface.

https://twitter.com/AndreaHardie/status/725026765815615489

I suppose it’s only a matter of time before she starts dressing up as Hitler.

For more on Hardie’s Twitter meltdown, see Janet Bloomfield Has Racist Twitter Meltdown; Says She Wants to Tweet a Photo of Herself in Blackface on Hail to the Gynocracy, which helped point me to some of the Tweets I used in this post.

If you do check out that post, do some poking around in Hail to the Gynocracy’s archives. The site, which tracks the alt-right and other reactionary doofuses, deserves a lot more attention that it gets.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

156 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
fractal greys
fractal greys
4 years ago

That eyeliner is shameful, lol

@LindsayIrene as bespake by the internet (b/c im a pleb who can’t afford hbo) Beyonce goes around swinging a bat called ‘hot sauce’ and smashes a car window w/ it, so JB must be referring to that. did she do anything else violent/destructive in the film?

Prob doesn’t even matter 1) even if Beyonce wrote up a declaration permitting every black person to go loot/destroy property for the sake of protest, this dishwater scum still doesn’t get to call her thuggish or feral. she and her ilk know they wouldn’t use those terms w/ white hockey/soccer fans who act the same over their team not winning a fucking match

Also, wearing fur means you’re lit an animal now? swing and a miss, JB, where can I see you serve up this peta realness to some white dames in pelts. oh I see, they’re not wearing braids and shaking their ass, gotcha

2) her thinking Bey’s making her woman’s scorn about race/BLM (on her blog) is esp full of shit considering she’s so desperate to properly politicize such an unfeminist action like forgiving & making up w/ her husband, her fragile little mind’s decided she must secretly be a conservative – you know except for that time she stood in front of FEMINIST for the world to see. and ***Flawless. and the past 10 or so years of her musical career.

a guy in my building opened the door for me today, JB’s free to pick apart whether or not I’m secretly a tradcon or if I’m on a misandric crusade to promote male servility to the clearly superior sex /s

3) “When Beyoncé plays into #BLM … she is approving, endorsing and validating their behavior” which behavior? the violent misgivings of the minority (a lot of which was actually self-defense against the tankrolling, tear gas launching police, some looters/rioters may have been undercover cops/hooligans from neighboring towns) or the peaceful majority? does this lily-white Joan of Arc to black men know that BLM calls this shit out themselves in their own movement?

4) “She shakes her ass and praises all the single ladies and the girlz who run the world, then goes home to husband and child.” someone’s card.mad because she couldn’t afford a chance to drop “welfare queen” in there as well. so am I, b/c I almost got bingo on my right-wing MRA card.

fractal greys
fractal greys
4 years ago

**someone’s mad because

@Imaginary Petal – ded, he just might be a weeaboo. In keeping w/ the literal anime Nazis discussion, Axis Powers Hetalia’s gotta be something they discuss at the dinner table

Alpine, RN
Alpine, RN
4 years ago

I’m SO glad someone brought up Ramsay Bolton 🙂 has nobody told her that she could also seek gainful employment as a priest of Tezcatlipoca? Lots of flaying to be done there…

Bazia
4 years ago

Never shoot off your bolts while drunk as a skunk.

Monzach
Monzach
4 years ago

@Alpine, RN

Thank you for bringing up the Aztecs and their frankly disturbing interest in flaying people! I think it’s a little sad that the Feast of the Flaying of Men has passed already for this year, though…still, there’s always next year. Mark down mid-to-late February in your calendars people, and start stocking up on obsidian blades.

Alpine, RN
Alpine, RN
4 years ago

@Monzach one never can have too many obsidian blades 🙂

Tezcatlipoca: for when you absolutely positively MUST dance about in the skin of your enemies

Kat
Kat
4 years ago

@Imaginary Petal

Sounds like the man Andrea Hardie is married to is an intellectually incurious kind of guy, considering that he’s a professor.

Maybe he has a go-along-to-get-along philosophy about Andrea Hardie’s actions.

Their relationship still baffles me but a little less now.

When in doubt about this kind of thing, I refer back to Hannah Arendt’s book Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil.

Kat
Kat
4 years ago

@dreemr

You can’t post all those adorable pics of cute little animals because it makes me want to google MORE of them, and I am at WORK.

Ha, ha! You say you’re at work–but your username says something different.

Kat
Kat
4 years ago

@dreemr

You can’t post all those adorable pics of cute little animals because it makes me want to google MORE of them, and I am at WORK.

Ha, ha! You say you’re at work–but your username says something different.:)

cretaceouskitteh78
cretaceouskitteh78
4 years ago

I can’t even bother to be offended by her because it must be really great to have the kind of life where you have time and energy to get upset by a fucking pop album. Which is kind of ironic considering that makes her just as petty, mindlessly offended, and worthless as she accuses feminists/women-that-aren’t-her of being.

Seriously, I can’t believe liberals and feminists are the ones who catch the most shit for supposedly being offended or “triggered” by everything. It’s just a bunch of FUCKING POP SONGS!!!

Sorry. Rant over. Imma go back to worrying about shit that matters now. 😛

authorialAlchemy
authorialAlchemy
4 years ago

I don’t know if this is the place, but Judgy’s disturbingly inept attempt at blackface recalls a sight I saw yesterday that rather threw me. She was a black lady with natural hair, wearing red serge coat of a certain cut, with blue trousers and back shoes. I didn’t dare ask if she was making a statement, or was simply unaware of the implication. People today, eh ?

What is the implication of that ensemble?

Scaly Llama
Scaly Llama
4 years ago

@ authorialAlchemy

I don’t know if this is the place, but Judgy’s disturbingly inept attempt at blackface recalls a sight I saw yesterday that rather threw me. She was a black lady with natural hair, wearing red serge coat of a certain cut, with blue trousers and back shoes. I didn’t dare ask if she was making a statement, or was simply unaware of the implication. People today, eh ?

What is the implication of that ensemble?

It’s the standard hair style, dress style and colours of a Golliwog Doll.

Kat
Kat
4 years ago

@authorialAlchemy, @Scaly Llama

I wondered about that too. Thanks for the information, Scaly Llama. These aren’t well known in the United States. I had to look up “Golliwog Doll.”

Wikipedia says that an Australian toy manufacturer still “proudly” produces these blackface-type rag dolls.

Newt
Newt
4 years ago

Wikipedia says that an Australian toy manufacturer still “proudly” produces these blackface-type rag dolls.

My mother “proudly” collected them, because… something something political correctness. I occasionally worry about the best way of disposing of them.

calmdown
calmdown
4 years ago

I found many Mirror articles complaining that these dolls were in no way racist and we liberals are ruining so many childhoods by criticizing them. I mean, FFS.

As for how to get rid of them? I’ll just compare them to another creepy old toy the Cymbal Monkey, which you can find great suggestions for dealing with in both Fallout 4 and Merlin’s Shop of Mystical Wonders.

mrex
mrex
4 years ago

@Scaley Llama

In any case, it’s more the wording I was objecting to – relevance was a secondary consideration. Saying someone is “married to”, rather than “the wife of”, with the overtones of possession that the latter connotes, is preferable. Even, as I said earlier, with garbage humans.

There is absolutely a history of women being defined by their husbands through coverture. For example, women lost not only their last names but often their first names as well, (ie. calling a couple Mr. and Mrs. John Doe), a practice that continues to this day in some formal settings. It’s especially awesome when you’re unmarried and people *still* send invitations to formal events as Mr. and Mrs. [boyfriend’s name]. That really gets my goat. 😉

However, I don’t get your logic behind how calling someone “the wife of” is showing them as being a possession. 🙂 It’s common for journalists to say “the wife of”, “the child of”, “the husband of”, “the boss of”, and so on. I don’t see it as showing possession so much as showing relationships.

I’m not trying to argue, I’m genuinely curious about your POV from a semantics angle. 🙂

Alan Robertshaw
Alan Robertshaw
4 years ago

@ scaley llama & mrrex

You’ve got me thinking about this, it’s interesting.

Don’t we call the use of “x’s” the possessive case or something? But does that mean ownership or control?

Saying for example “the slave’s master” is a valid clause, but by definition it can’t be connotating ownership.

Has that always been the case though?

We now use things like the “subject’s object”, “subject of object” and even “belong” (as in say “I belong to the class of animals called mammals” without implying any sense of possession; but is that something that’s evolved in English and does this crop up in other languages?

Any linguists know about that?

mrex
mrex
4 years ago

@Alan

I’m not a linguist, but I think there’s a long history in the West of seeing relationships, both romantic and not, as “mutual ownership”. My wholely uneducated guess is that “the possessive clause” springs from that?

To use your “slave’s master” example, while the master may have legally owned the slave, many slave owner’s would feel that they were “mutually owned” by the slave (and for that matter his wife) since he viewed himself as *being responsible for* taking care of his slave/wife who would otherwise be struggling for food and shelter without him. And yes, obviously such a view is completely delusional, which is why it’s slowly becoming a thing of the past. (I hope.) 🙂

mrex
mrex
4 years ago

*”possessive case” not “possessive clause”. :/

kupo
kupo
4 years ago

@mrex
Given the history of and continued treatment of women as being addressed in terms of their husbands, does it really matter whether semantically the possessive in this case implies ownership? Even very accomplished women are still referred to in articles solely about them and their achievements by name dropping their husbands and pointing out their husbands’ achievements.

varalys the dark
varalys the dark
4 years ago

Hmm crossbow bolts make sense. I just kept thinking of that Monty Python sketch about the gangland killers who deal with their enemies by nailing their heads to the floor (“Dinsdale”). What a ridiculous woman.

Scaly Llama
Scaly Llama
4 years ago

@mrex

However, I don’t get your logic behind how calling someone “the wife of” is showing them as being a possession. 🙂 It’s common for journalists to say “the wife of”, “the child of”, “the husband of”, “the boss of”, and so on. I don’t see it as showing possession so much as showing relationships.

I’m not trying to argue, I’m genuinely curious about you’re POV from a semantics angle. 🙂

Hi mrex, thanks for asking! I don’t have time to provide a proper response just yet – busy day at work! – but I will as soon as possible.

I will make one brief comment however, which is to invite you and others to consider whether something being done commonly is a good enough reason to continue it in the future. There’s no denying that “the wife/son/child of” is a common construction within English writing, but does that mean we should continue to use it and/or allow it as an acceptable usage?

I’ll get to the other semantic aspects later 😊

Have a good one, all!

AltoFronto
AltoFronto
4 years ago

Wait a minute, Hardie hunts for sport, right? If anything, I’d say that makes *her* more of a violent animal. Especially when her weapon of choice is a compound bow. Sure, it’s more technically advanced than a simple longbow or recurve, but it’s still a pretty primitive way to shoot.

Threatening to maim and savage anyone who insults her on Twitter? Blatant disregard for the law, common decency, and just about any of the standards of human society? Hardie sounds pretty feral to me. And possibly rabid.

Amy Housewine
Amy Housewine
4 years ago

Kat: Hardie is associate prof, so he’s tenured. He’ll be OK as long as he doesn’t start spewing this crap in class.

I’m not so sure that the husband of Andrea Hardie is that immune. A minority student (or, at this point, any woman) in his class could file a complaint that s/he feels unable to learn from someone so closely affiliated with hateful abuse and bile, and it would get at least an investigation, in my experience of Canadian universities. (I don’t actually condone this, as long as he has the wit to keep his own professional identity separate; while I have no doubt he’s very nearly as distasteful as she is, based upon their courtship as she describes it, we mustn’t go down the road of holding people liable for their relatives’ actions)

At any rate, I do hope news of his career woes and/or their divorce becomes public. It’s fun to watch karma play out.

As someone with a passing knowledge of the Hardies’ academic field, I have to say it’s … unimpressive. His teaching ratings are not entirely surprising. The fact that he’s assistant dean is, but again, we’ll see how long that lasts.

And I do wonder how the other moms in Thunder Bay playgroups react to their kids playing with the Hardielings, given the exceptionally violent tweets, on top of the racism and misogyny. My kids don’t spend time around anyone connected to threats of ‘flaying,’ thanks.

(I’m not doxxing; she has Thunder Bay in her Twitter bio. Although her account is now down, heh.)

Bazia
4 years ago

As far as addressing many public women as the “wife of”, that’s insulting when the focus of the story is some accomplishement or “non-wife” story. But Hardie is making a career and a political cause of being a wife. She has written many articles about how women should be subservient to their husbands and how she is, and generally pushing the idea that women must be satisfied with the role of wife and mother. So to describe her that way is certainly not insulting — it’s exactly how she identifies herself.

Kat
Kat
4 years ago

@Amy Housewine

Kat: Hardie is associate prof, so he’s tenured. He’ll be OK as long as he doesn’t start spewing this crap in class.

I’m not so sure that the husband of Andrea Hardie is that immune.

I tend to agree with you that the reputation of the man that Andrea Hardie married isn’t immune from her online racist and sexist rants, threats, and spewing of bile.

I’m neither an academic nor a Canadian. But students these days are usually extremely savvy about social media, so I think they must know what Andrea Hardie’s up to. I’d bet that the entire college–and the entire community–knows.

I can’t know in specific how her behavior threatens his career or reputation. But I have to believe that it doesn’t add anything positive.

As for their social life–I’m glad that I’m not Andrea Hardie. I can only imagine the dirty looks, cold shoulders, and frigid greetings she gets from her neighbors. I can only imagine how the parents of her children’s friends pity those kids. I can only imagine how people cross the street to avoid her. I can only imagine the teachers of those kids, steeling themselves for a parent-teacher conference with Andrea effing Hardie.

I’m sure that this social injustice warrior (SIW) considers herself a hero, not a jerk. Keep telling yourself that, Andrea Hardie! And by all means, keep shoveling that SIW shit.

Amy Housewine
Amy Housewine
4 years ago

Kat – well, I’m glad you’re not her too, but these problems are totally of her own making! I feel bad for her kids, and the teachers, parents, other soccer moms etc who have to interact with her. It must be surreal. I’m sure she’s sweet as pie to their faces, but how does one respond to someone superficially well socialized but actually this awful?

Re: Professor Hardie – I think it’s inevitable that there will be consequences, even if they’re not immediate or formal. For sure everyone knows. When I was a grad student, I’d have avoided taking a class with a prof like this, much less having him as a supervisor, because marrying someone like JB is a sign of spectacularly poor judgment (at best) and nobody needs that in their lives as a teacher/supervisor. As an academic, even if I liked his work, I’d be exceptionally leery of collaborating on anything with him, for the same reason, and so my name doesn’t come up in Google searches of him as her husband. At a certain point, if you can’t attract good students, research assistants and collaborators, you’re not doing your job as an academic. With tenure, that won’t get you fired – although that system is evolving – but it will slow you down, and get you a reputation that inhibits making full professor, being hired somewhere that isn’t Thunder Bay (which everyone teaching there dearly wants), and so on.

Either he will come to really, really resent her for what she’s doing to his image as a competent, intelligent professional (ie demolishing it) or he shares her views and doesn’t mind. ‘Twill be interesting to watch.

Kat
Kat
4 years ago

These problems are totally of her own making!

True that.

F Harper
F Harper
4 years ago

I’m sure she’s sweet as pie to their faces, but how does one respond to someone superficially well socialized but actually this awful?

It appears that some people are shocked that a certain right-winger chooses to hammer back when verbal abuse gets thrown her way. Everyone knows that conservatives are supposed to react to threats of violence with grace and humility. Everyone knows that conservatives are supposed to mumble apologies when gossiping prigs like David Futrelle dispense social justice by calling them names and cherry-picking their comments.

You’ve created a nice little toxic corner of the internet for yourself, Mr. Futrelle. I would urge you to come up for air once in a while, lest you choke on the fumes of your own dishonesty.

Imaginary Petal
Imaginary Petal
4 years ago

What specific verbal abuse was Beyonce throwing at Andrea Hardie?

Also, if you’re going to make accusations of dishonesty it’s a good idea to cite at least one example.

Scildfreja
Scildfreja
4 years ago

cherry-picking their comments

Lol

We can read twitter timelines too, you know. If he’s cherry-picking, it’s because it’s the only kind of tree around and it’s a whole damn orchard.

Everyone knows that conservatives are supposed to react to threats of violence with grace and humility.

Everyone knows that minorities are supposed to react to threats of violence and humiliation with grace and humility, too, right?

Take your medicine, child. We know it’s bitter. We’re familiar with the taste.

F Harper
F Harper
4 years ago

If he’s cherry-picking, it’s because it’s the only kind of tree around and it’s a whole damn orchard.

Cherry picking, as in somehow failing to show any of the tweets that she was responding to, as in making it appear that she was lashing out, when in fact she was responding in kind to hateful tweets sent her way.

Everyone knows that minorities are supposed to react to threats of violence and humiliation with grace and humility, too, right?

If someone says that they will “cut you like a New York cheesecake”, is your first reaction to quickly check their skin color and decide whether or not they are a valid target for retaliation? Because if you do, you are a racist.

Take your medicine, child. We know it’s bitter. We’re familiar with the taste.

I don’t need to be medicated into a blissful stupor with hypocritical moral relativism and uniformity of thought. I prefer difficult facts over comfortable self-deceptions. Truth is the antidote to your simpering self-congratulations.

Imaginary Petal
Imaginary Petal
4 years ago

How long before he calls us “sheeple”? :p

Scildfreja
Scildfreja
4 years ago

Cherry picking, as in somehow failing to show any of the tweets that she was responding to, as in making it appear that she was lashing out, when in fact she was responding in kind to hateful tweets sent her way.

I was subverting the metaphor, sir.

Read the article. He talks about that.

If someone says that they will “cut you like a New York cheesecake”, is your first reaction to quickly check their skin color and decide whether or not they are a valid target for retaliation? Because if you do, you are a racist

You don’t know the definition of the word. Nor are you the arbiter of how it applies.

I’ll take my education on what racism is from the actual literature on the subject, not some turkey clucking by a random internet forum. Thanks.

I don’t need to be medicated into a blissful stupor with hypocritical moral relativism and uniformity of thought. I prefer difficult facts over comfortable self-deceptions. Truth is the antidote to your simpering self-congratulations.

You prefer facts only when they agree with your preconceptions. That’s the opposite of difficult. You recognize truth by how much it hurts, not by how right you think it feels.

You prefer moral absolutism, because you get to define what is and is not absolute. Surprise surprise, it concludes that you’re right! Shocking.

I can provide chains of logical inference on this shit that would make your head spin. I can refer to bodies of work representing hundreds of thousands of hours of devoted efforts, with the statistical and DoE punch to knock you out of the park.

You wouldn’t know truth if it knocked on your door and asked if it could borrow a cup of sugar.

Get outta here with your weak sauce. You say you have truth? Get out your pencil and show your fucking work.

Scildfreja
Scildfreja
4 years ago

(In retrospect, I should have said “One recognizes truth by how much it hurts, not by how right you think it feels” and not”You recognize truth by how much it hurts, not by how right you think it feels”. Mea culpa.)

F Harper
F Harper
4 years ago

One recognizes truth by how much it hurts, not by how right you think it feels.

I have a somewhat more objective standard than feelings. Truth is revealed by its universality and its falsifiability. If you claim that all white males are angry and bigoted, it takes only one example of a calm, rational white male to disprove it. We arrive at truth by testing each case until we run out of possible alternatives. Even then, our truth may turn out to be falsehood if a new counterexample appears. Pain is no barometer of truth.

I’ll take my education on what racism is from the actual literature on the subject, not some turkey clucking by a random internet forum. Thanks.

Ah, yes the literature. No, don’t tell me, I’ve read this one before. It is impossible to be racist if you are not of the dominant cultural or ethnic group in a society. So when the Hutus decided to kill all of the Tutsis, there was no racism involved. It was just the nice poor people giving all of the horrible, racist elites their just due.

Racism is either nearly nonexistent in the Western world, or it is everywhere, depending upon your definition. Which one it is depends on the whims of the moment and whom you might wish to hurt with your baseless accusations.

You prefer facts only when they agree with your preconceptions.

And you are a model of impartiality, clearly. That’s why you’ve already started in on attacking my character.

You prefer moral absolutism, because you get to define what is and is not absolute. Surprise surprise, it concludes that you’re right!

I “prefer” universalizable moral principles. Moral relativism, by definition, models one set of standards for one group and another set of standards for another group. Universalizable morality comes out of a process of discovery in which those moral principles which lead to a peaceful, just society for everyone are chosen over those principles that elevate some to the denigration of others. Moral relativism is the justification for tyranny and enslavement.

I can provide chains of logical inference on this shit that would make your head spin. I can refer to bodies of work representing hundreds of thousands of hours of devoted efforts, with the statistical and DoE punch to knock you out of the park.

Oh, please, bring it on. Why not start with the wage gap? I’m sure you’ve got a whole library full of top-notch research showing that women earn 77 cents on the toxic male dollar for doing the exact same type, quality, and quantity of work. Let’s do this.

Imaginary Petal
Imaginary Petal
4 years ago

Oooh, someone read one book about morality once.

pitshade
pitshade
4 years ago

Or at least skimmed a reddit post to pick up some talking points.

F Harper
F Harper
4 years ago

Oh, and lest I be accused of cherry picking:

I was subverting the metaphor, sir.

Read the article. He talks about that.

And I ignored your attempt at linguistic sorcery because it was pointless. Futrelle spins the story to his own ends. Hardie originally criticized Beyonce for perpetrating black stereotypes. Then people started tweeting abuse at her as though she had used those stereotypes herself. After one person essentially dared her to put on blackface, that’s exactly what she did. The abuse that followed escalated, and she did not back down, returning it in kind.

This is where we are now. We, the well-adjusted and rational, have been subject to the abuse of intersectional feminists such as yourself for long enough. We won’t submit and we won’t back down any longer. Call us racist, sexist, mysogynist whatever-phobes and it will slide off us because we simply do not care anymore. Truth matters. Your anger at our lack of capitulation does not.

Imaginary Petal
Imaginary Petal
4 years ago

After one person essentially dared her to put on blackface, that’s exactly what she did.

“No no, you don’t understand! She’s only being racist because people THINK she’s a racist! So she just had to prove them right!”

Imaginary Petal
Imaginary Petal
4 years ago

When describing Andrea Hardie, “well-adjusted and rational” aren’t the first words that come to mind.

Why are you so angry anyway? Didn’t she say she got suspended on purpose?

F Harper
F Harper
4 years ago

No no, you don’t understand! She’s only being racist because people THINK she’s a racist! So she just had to prove them right!

I’m not making excuses for her. I am setting the record straight. She doesn’t need my excuses. She’s just calling out the empty threats and the endless bullying.

Why are you so angry anyway? Didn’t she say she got suspended on purpose?

Describing someone as angry so that you can discredit their argument is child’s play. What else do you have in your playbook?

Imaginary Petal
Imaginary Petal
4 years ago

Your argument is discredited through being factually incorrect. Your weird anger is irrelevant, but hilarious.

Dude, nobody’s buying this shtick. Bullies have always whined about their victims being the real bullies. That’s the entire point of GamerGate, and social conservatism as a whole. Update your game.

Handsome "These Pretzels Suck" Jack (formerly Pandapool)
Handsome "These Pretzels Suck" Jack (formerly Pandapool)
4 years ago

I have a somewhat more objective standard than feelings. Truth is revealed by its universality and its falsifiability. If you claim that all white males are angry and bigoted, it takes only one example of a calm, rational white male to disprove it.

http://i.imgur.com/NRUB8fI.jpg

isidore13
isidore13
4 years ago

F Harper: “I prefer facts to feelings and am therefore superior to all you SJWs!”

F Harper: *whines about judgybitch’s hurt feefees without presenting any facts*

Scildfreja
Scildfreja
4 years ago

Ah, me. Emotions do catch up with me sometimes, you’re right. I’ll check that in my replies. You’ve touched on my favourite topic, rationality, so I’ll even be congenial!

http://kucykimylittlepony.blog.pl/files/2013/03/143216-animated-fluttershy.gif

I have a somewhat more objective standard than feelings. Truth is revealed by its universality and its falsifiability. … Pain is no barometer of truth.

I’m afraid you read like a starry-eyed first year student, sir. Sure, yes, falsifiability, universality, etc. Lots of criteria are useful. All proper indicators of truth.

Problem is, we as humans have to judge whether something meets those criteria or not.

Problem is, we aren’t rationality machines.

(That includes you.)

Our ability to think logically is a thin smear across our prefrontal lobes, combined with a smattering of meaty globules of limbic system, all stretched like a skein over emotion and impulse. We’re very bad at rationality, and very, very good at rationalization.

This leaves us vulnerable to thinking our conclusions are universal when they are specific, and that they are true when false conditions occur.

All of the talk of “universality” and “falsifiability” and the like starts sounding paper thin once you actually start doing some DoE. You realize that you need more heuristics for determining truth in a universe of emotional uncertainty.

Thus the assumption of discomfort. Truth hurts. There are a billion ways to be wrong and only one way to be right. Odds are, you’re wrong about the thing you hold dear. That applies to everything. You’re probably wrong.

Einstein wasn’t able to accept quantum mechanics. Newton couldn’t believe that gravity was a force that governed the heavens. Science eventually corrected itself, but that doesn’t work for individuals.

Ah, yes the literature. No, don’t tell me, I’ve read this one before. It is impossible to be racist if you are not of the dominant cultural or ethnic group in a society. … Which one it is depends on the whims of the moment and whom you might wish to hurt with your baseless accusations.

Discussions of racism, as anything else involving social interactions, must be context-sensitive. Your sarcastic depiction of genocide does not apply. I’d say more, but this whole line is a straw-man.

(And frankly, I don’t want to hurt anyone at all, which is why I don’t got to forums and insult the people there just because they don’t agree with me.

Welcome, by the way!)

And you are a model of impartiality, clearly. That’s why you’ve already started in on attacking my character.

I didn’t claim to be impartial; I’m human, and you came in here and started insulting my friends and their judgement. You got what you came for. Why else would you come in here guns blazing like that, but to get yourself some hostility?

I “prefer” universalizable moral principles. … Moral relativism is the justification for tyranny and enslavement.

I prefer universalizable moral principles too! We agree on that, hooray. I don’t believe that they’re mandated by god or the universe, mind you – they’re an outcome of us being social creatures with evolved patterns of cooperation. Nor are they simple. Ethics is hard. But we seem to agree on this at least.

Oh, please, bring it on. Why not start with the wage gap? I’m sure you’ve got a whole library full of top-notch research showing that women earn 77 cents on the toxic male dollar for doing the exact same type, quality, and quantity of work. Let’s do this.

Please.

Sir, you’re the one challenging published and accepted findings by reputable institutions. Which you’re allowed to do! Please, do!

But you have to actually do it.

Not just demand that I provide more evidence. You have to shoot that down first. Then I can either show the flaw in your refutation, or drop the finding.

That’s how science works, sir. Someone makes a claim and provides evidence – that’s the “77% wage gap!” statement. If you don’t like it, you have to refute it.

Feel free to! I could use the cognitive exercise. And you don’t have to quote specifics if you don’t want to. I’m familiar with the methods used to generate those results and can wing it if you prefer.

Viscaria
Viscaria
4 years ago

“I had to steal the diamonds, Your Honour. It was a triple dog dare.

“Wow, a real triple dog dare?!”

“Well, I mean, it was essentially a triple dog dare.”

“Hmm. Well, in that case, you’re free to go. Enjoy your new diamonds!”

Imaginary Petal
Imaginary Petal
4 years ago

@Viscaria

Isn’t it ironic how Hardie’s tagline for her blog is “the radical notion that women are adults”, referencing the old manosphere talking point about how women need to “take responsibility for their actions”.

Yet when she gets herself suspended from Twitter (again), it’s eeeeverybody else’s fault.