Chris Brown’s Twitter Deactivated After Tweet War with Comedy Writer

Premium Membership, The Good Men Project

About The Good Feed Blog Editors

Comments

  1. …how dumb do you have to be to start a Twitter fight with a comedy writer? That’s like starting a rap battle with Kool Moe Dee. That’s like starting a fistfight with Joe Louis. That’s like starting an outdated-reference fight with Noah Brand.

    • John Anderson says:

      I think she started with him. I had a battle of wits with George Wilborn. He decided to use me as material for a show he did. I derailed his act so badly he was high fiving and thanking me at the same time because that ended up being the highlight of his show based on audience reaction.

  2. If I never had to hear about Chris Brown again I would be ok. SIGH.

    • Joanna Schroeder says:

      I’m with you on this.

      I do think he’s culturally relevant, however, because he represents the degree to which our society will put up with bad behavior.

      Lindsay Lohan is another example. Where do we, as a society, just draw the line and say, “We’re done with you until you find a way to make real amends and make different choices.”

      I hope the best for both of them. I believe they both battle very strong demons of one sort or the other, most likely both in the mental health area. The best outcome here would be that both Lohan and Brown (separately, obviously) find treatments that help them lead healthier lives and be better role models.

    • I too can be very happy at never hearing the name “Chris Brown” ever again – but I’m so untrendy and out of it that I had to google the name as well as Jenny Johnson, Kool Moe Dee and Joe Louise to even decipher what the whole debacle’s about. P^)

      I will never get that time back.

      From Huffington: One of Johnson’s most popular tweets, “Call me old fashioned, but Chris Brown should be in prison,” was retweeted 1,869 times.

      1869 = important, relevant, significant on the web where Twitter has over Half a Billion Users – so that’s 0.0004% of Twits thought it was even worth mentioning? I may not be the most Twittering of types, but even I know that if it aint got a hashtag and aint trending it’s not worth wasting your thumbs to find out what’s goin on.

  3. Considering that it looks like Jenny Johnson threw the first punch I honestly don’t hold this against Brown, ho comment and all. No pity for Johnson, no rage at Brown, no trying to say he is wrong in this interaction by bootstrapping it back to his attack on Rihanna.

    • Joanna Schroeder says:

      I disagree. Why is sexual violence brought into the equation?

      I think that’s where it goes too far. Why not question her character as she did his? Why did it have to become about shitting in her mouth? He took it up a level with that, showing that with women, all they are to him are objects of sexual humiliation.

      Here’s what she just tweeted, and I agree with her that this is perplexing:

      According to Team Breezy, if you have a difference of opinion with someone, “eating a dick” is the cure for any and all problems. #Knowledge

      • Why did she jab him with that commentary in the first place?

        On rethinking this sure I’ll agree that the ho comment was wrong. but beyond that why aren’t we asking why she messed with a known and established powder keg?

        Or better yet why aren’t any of the people that are so quick to comment on this little twitter war questioning her character?

        It’s getting a bit odd to me that despite people not being able to think about Brown without instantly thinking about the bad stuff he has done will still turn around and give him the time of day and then get all upset when he responds with that bad behavior.

        Here’s what she just tweeted, and I agree with her that this is perplexing:

        According to Team Breezy, if you have a difference of opinion with someone, “eating a dick” is the cure for any and all problems. #Knowledge
        She says that like she didn’t know that Brown would respond that way. This isn’t anywhere near the first time Brown has blown up like this on someone. What the world could have possibly made her think her decision to make such a comment would turn out differently.

        I’ll give her one thing. She wanted some publicity so she fed the troll and got it.

        • Joanna Schroeder says:

          t’s getting a bit odd to me that despite people not being able to think about Brown without instantly thinking about the bad stuff he has done will still turn around and give him the time of day and then get all upset when he responds with that bad behavior.

          I don’t totally disagree with what you’re saying here, but I suspect a lot of people wish to call out Chris Brown over and over in order to remind the young women in “Team Breezy” that his is a proven dangerous person who is idolized and made into a teen idol.

          But you’re right, I wouldn’t poke that bear.

          • @ Joanna: What is truly disgusting about this tableau is the overwhelming desire by some to make Chris Brown into a modern day Ike Turner. As a result, far too much is being read into what he said, as if there is some great hidden meaning which confirms what we all know to be true—that Chris Brown is dangerous and hates ALL women. Add to that the fact that he is a black man and you have a recipe for rampant bias.

            So, Chris Brown becomes THE symbol, around which people rally to despise, of men hating women.God knows they need a symbol.
            This is all so phony when one understands that gay women, some of them feminists, rape and beat up their partners at statistically similar rates as straight men. But women, especially feminists women, are loathe to talk openly about any of this information. Add to this the fact that gay men, trans men, bisexual men,bisexual women etc, all experience as victims and perpetrators rape and abuse and clearly this isn’t just Chris Brown’s problem;even though we pretend that it is. As a black man myself, I am pretty fed up with the black women and white women, pretending that the only serious violence that occurs in the black community happens at his hands. Bell Hooks and others are not telling the full story. When was the last or has their ever been a time when the face of gender abuse was a gay woman, or a gay man, or a straight woman? Don’t they deserve to be in prison too? Where is societies collective ire?

          • I don’t totally disagree with what you’re saying here, but I suspect a lot of people wish to call out Chris Brown over and over in order to remind the young women in “Team Breezy” that his is a proven dangerous person who is idolized and made into a teen idol.
            I’m sorry but I have to call bullshit on this Joanna. At this point people are not trying to reach out to those women. When we get to this point where it is seen as okay to intentionally provoke him because he’s done bad things it’s attention grabbing (and probably some ego stroking).

            Honestly ogwriter may have a point about trying to turn him into the modern day Ike Turner. And I’d like ogwriter says I still can’t help but notice that straight guys get demonized in a way that other walks of life nowhere near experience.

            • @Danny – I actually have to agree with your points and with calling Bull Crap.

              This whole Twatter fest has been about attacking one person and then attempting to piggy back and issue on it. It’s bad Journalism – bad net Content – It makes the supposed central issue of IPV – Domestic Abuse subservient to the racial, social, sexists slants that others want to throw about.

              It’s about attacking the person and NOT the ISSUE! It’s a basic basic basic reality of editing.

              As I keep watching this whole none event unfold and expand it’s amazing what keeps coming up and how it keeps being welded onto the nickel and dime that out pushed out of the piggy bank in the first place. It’s clear some have been saving the nickels and dimes for a rainy day!

              As I read I see the following conclusions and allusions being pushed out. Only Black men commit Domestic Violence – That is being pushed out by a predominately White Middle Class Media – Women are always Victims and in Particular Black Women invite Victimhood.

              Women never commit IPV – Domestic Abuse and if it ever is in the media it’s never white women doing it and never to white men.

              The focus and discussion is Dishonest – Disingenuous – Disregards reality. … oh and apparently it’s fine for someone to call themselves a comedienne bate people and then laugh and laugh when people get pissed.

              Some seem to think that’s a comedy stereotype for High School Girls – but I have to say it seem to me that there is a whole group of white middle class middle aged women who need to go back to school and unlearn a great deal – and maybe get eye tests whilst they are at it. The Myopia is a killer – and they should also not drive until its addressed. Baby on Board is no protection.

            • Mr Supertypo says:

              Media, as I understand it, she is actually trolling him?

            • @Mr Supertypo says:

              Media, as I understand it, she is actually trolling him?

              Very On point question and the answer is YES – when you use the definitions being applied by academics, researchers and law enforcement, Jenny Johnson’s conduct – and more so the history – it is pure troll and meets the definitions of cyberstalking too.

              Of course, some reading that will simply Flambé themselves in instant indignation, because they are looking with Rose Tinted vision and refuse to use clarity. Instant indignation is even worse that Instant Potato – and it has more lumps! There is an ingrained and almost automatic bias to defend without consideration and reality has little impact upon such closed minds with bigot blinds pulled down.

              Such closed minds are also massively resistant to any form of information or eduction that could provide a better illuminated reality. Of course that will upset many because they wish to perfect the false image of trolls – abusers – stalker as males with body odour eating pizza in darkened rooms. Anytning else is just not possible and it is not that they can’t conceive of an different reality – they refuse to allow anything other than their demanded reality to exist. It is an oddly neurotic defence position and of course I use the word neurotic in it’s scientific/psychological definition and how it links tyo such matters as Prejudice and it’s empowerment within the individual. The neurotic are unable to alter willingly and unable to assimilate new and emergent information – reality due to a basic lack of cognitive plasticity.

              That image and so much more got blown out of the water with the Publication of the the interim finding on ECHO – Electronic Communication Harassment Observation published 2011 – and with the work still ongoing on a global basis.

              Following a person electronically via the net to gather information about them with the intent to use that information to cause alarm distress and even to damage the person’s reputation, by either attack or incitement to get the person to abreact, is by definition stalking! Admitting to hating the person and displaying the same pattern of harassment over an extended period of time (Read years) is just further evidence of the improper and even illegal conduct.

              Some will demand that all other history and even gender has to be woven into a complex design to cover such reality. That simply shows prejudice and bias as well as a lack of intellectual honesty.

              Of course there are those who believe in Justice when it is themselves, and they selfishly hold the view that all are equal in sight of the law as long as it’s convenient and supports their personal biases, prejudices and even pet hates. They believe in Justice and Law as a corner convenience store where they can shop at speed and change what ever it si they are stuffing in their mouths and others minds 24/7 – 365 – any holiday and at the lowest possible costs.

              Of course as soon as their view is challenged in any way others are not to be seen or treated as equal – they are not to be protected – and the double standards, biases and propensity for summary Justice – Lynching and and Screams of “He Had It Coming” just get in the way. It;s terrible seeing people running from the Corner Store with as many Nooses as they can get – and what is worse they don’t care what the price is – they don’t care for cost at all.

              It’s often quite sickening to see supposedly decent and rational people unmask themselves as legal bigots at their earliest convenience – and as conveniently as possible.

              When it comes to Trolling and Cyber Stalking It does not matter what the abuser says, it’s the patterns and conduct that is analysed. All are equal in sight of the law. Of course some will defend anything under US amendments, but whilst it is defensible it does not stop the true nature from being apprehended and even named.

              ECHO finds gender parity in both Perps and Victims for Cyber Stalking and Troll Nature/Activity. The issue is that if a man undertakes a particular conduct he is seen as a Troll – Stalker. A Woman does it is seen as a Joke! Remove gender and focus only on the dynamics and you see reality. Some really do need to take off their rose tinted specs and improve the general lighting that they use when looking at the world.

              Funny that – comedienne says she is funny and her conduct is comedic – yet when comedic status is removed it becomes very different! When analysing abuse you remove all gender and other labelsl to gain clear sight of the playing field and who is not playing by the rules.

              The fact that some wish to claim only focus upon specified words of phrases is irrelevant. I have personally been subjected to stalking and death threats. Thankfully the judge was both rational and interested in the subject. They found it fascinating that a perp would attempt to hide intent and death threats behind Chinese sayings such as “He who seeks vengeance must dig two graves one for his enemy & one for himself.”. Of course when that was contracted against highly loaded, emotional and controlling statements that the perp did not care of they ended up dead as long as they achieved revenge…

              It was even odder when all the facts and pithy sayings were looked at – and just how nasty and manipulative the threats were. Thankfully the perp has been kept under lock and key and far far away for some time. She remains most unhappy – especially at how the judge stated how she had used her sex in an attempt to manipulate others (men and women). I did thank the judge for her perspicacity, veracity and sagacity in dealing with the law and the offender.

              The Judge told me she had never come across a more fascinating and even frightening case. The judge also made clear she had been asked to take the case due to the repeated claims by the offender and convicted stalker of how they suffered sexual harassment and sexism – claims that started to ring so hollow when made to the Right Honourable Lady Judge!

              Some consider Trolling an Art – but the reality is it’s easy to see if you leave you biases and prejudices at the door when you asses events and the conduct. If you remove bias and how some abuse privilege to twist reality, you do get a far clearer understanding of reality.

              Shouting that they deserved it and had it coming is the last bastion of the desperate who seek to gain judgement by Emotion and not by Legal Reason or anything akin to Logic… or humanity.

              I have found over the years that when anyone cries out and instigates any form of lynching, not only are there most serious questions as to why the one with the rope believes they are entitled to lynch – but it is necessary to look at the underpinnings of the belief systems and find out where that entitlement leads in the twisted labyrinthine basements that some attempt to build the scaffold on. One finds so many assumed, presumed and false privileges used to build such structures.

              “Anyone who doesn’t take truth seriously in small matters cannot be trusted in large ones either.”
              Albert Einstein

              I take the truth most seriously – and others will take misrepresenting the truth equally seriously. But they seem to forget that you can’t loose the truth but you can loose the misinterpretation, and so you still end up having to deal with the Truth, the Whole Truth and Nothing But the Truth. That is why human advance in all areas is built upon truth and the only thing which holds so many back the the absolute refusal to deal with the truth.

              Lynch away, but killing the messenger does not change the truth – only show those who are either deliberately unwilling or incapable of dealing with it.

            • Simply put the answer is YES and some – detailed response in mod land!


            • It’s about attacking the person and NOT the ISSUE! It’s a basic basic basic reality of editing.

              Exactly.

              Chris Brown has more than enough events in his recent history to show how terrible of a person he is. In fact a few people here have pointed to his multiple blow ups and fights and other bad things he gotten into as proof that he is such a horrible person.

              My question is this:

              If Brown has such an established history of bad behavior and the point is to talk about the issues and not the person then why not pull up any one of those UNPROVOKED events in his history?

              Why go through the trouble of generating a new event? And yes Johnson generated this event by provoking him.

              Again if this were about the issues Brown has more than enough in his track record to point to and look at. So why generate more events?

              The answer will show itself when in the future the next time Brown does something bad and this event is added to the list. Be on the look out for when this tweet war comes up in the future and the fact that Jenny Johnson instigated it is convienently wiped from people’s memory. And I really mean this.

              Who here is willing to bet that if Brown gets into some trouble next year people that reach back to this event to add to the list will actually remember to mention that unlike all his unprovoked events this one was instigated by Johnson herself?

              If people want to talk about the issues that’s cool and all. But this is anything but talking about the issue. This is just chance to get a free shot in on Brown and then retroactively justifying it with, “But he’s a terrible person!”. And the inappropriatness and crudeness of Brown’s response doesn’t change that.

              (This is reminding me of that letter that Jamie did back in March to Joanah Hill because Hill frown faced Billy Crystal for knocking on his size at the Oscars. The fact that it was Billy Crystal and the fact that Jonah was an Oscar hopeful supposedly makes it okay to knock on his size I guess.)

            • @ Danny

              The answer will show itself when in the future the next time Brown does something bad and this event is added to the list. Be on the look out for when this tweet war comes up in the future and the fact that Jenny Johnson instigated it is convienently wiped from people’s memory. And I really mean this.

              Yes I agree. The Provoke – Retreat – Reinvent – Provoke cycle is classic in cyber harassment and cyber stalking. Even the months of long hiatus across the cycle are a classic pattern.

              As I said, I knew nothing about these characters until this thread came up and it has been fascinating to come to the whole sequence of events without prejudice and look at the patterns. I am so aware that some object when I start looking at patterns in behaviour, language and thinking.

              This Mr Brown is not saint – and I’m sure that this Jenny Johnson is far better acquainted with the devil than she would ever let on!

              1) She has stated publicly she hates him
              2) There is a long established pattern and history of her initiating contact
              3) Each time she estanlsihes contact she provokes with reference to past activity
              4) She is aware of his language – style and usage – and then complains when he uses it
              5) Feigned ignorance whilst using race to stir negative views is racism.

              That is a very nasty and well known combination and pattern! She uses the label of comedy to shield her cations and also to garner public support.

              Some wish to discredit my analysis by claiming I wish to defend Mr Brown – which is of course attack upon me and not the subject = Ad Hominum.

          • John Anderson says:

            @ Joanna

            “but I suspect a lot of people wish to call out Chris Brown over and over in order to remind the young women in “Team Breezy” that his is a proven dangerous person who is idolized and made into a teen idol.”

            That’s why I said I wouldn’t have sympathy for him if she said beating your girlfriend instead of a worthless piece of shit. How is not mentioning his transgression reminding people of anything?

      • John Anderson says:

        When you grow up male, there are certain cultural buzz words or phrases that you learn. It’s like a short hand way of speaking, but connotes a lot more meaning. I’m trying to explain it politely, but it prevents her from talking is the point you need to focus on. It’s not just the sex act, but while performing the act, she is unable to speak.

        • Joanna Schroeder says:

          It’s not just the sex act, but while performing the act, she is unable to speak.

          I think you’re right, John.

          But I think we also need to see it a step deeper and realize that when a guy tells a woman whom he obviously dislikes, who clearly HATES him, to engage in a sexual act, he’s obviously talking about sexual assault. She wouldn’t WANT to do it, right? And yet he is saying, “suck my dick” – that’s pretty forceful.

          • John Anderson says:

            “he’s obviously talking about sexual assault. She wouldn’t WANT to do it, right? And yet he is saying, “suck my dick” – that’s pretty forceful.”

            “ohnson, who is often cited as one of the funniest presences on Twitter, has poked fun at Brown ever since his 2009 arrest ”

            http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/25/chris-browns-vulgar-twitter-attack-on-jenny-johnson-comedy-writer_n_2188841.html#slide=1799817

            That’s true, but she also doesn’t want to shut up. So you’re right she doesn’t want to do it because that’s how she seeks fame and fortune. When you really put it into context, you don’t need to use some generic gender based view. These people have interacted for three years and that’s the point you’re missing. She’s been messing with him for three years. So of course when he finally tells her to shut up, he uses the most forceful way he knows of saying it.

            • Hold on. So she’s been after him for this long and when Brown blows up NOW all of a sudden it’s a problem? This wasn’t a single insolated instance where he went from 0 to horrific insults in one tweet flat?

              So was it a nod to sexual assault or telling someone to shut up in a forceful manner after a long time of mistreatment?

              This is sort of reminding me of his attacka against Rihanna. When he attacked her there was some belief that she actually attacked him first and people went ape shit to shout that possibility down. There is a big difference between, “Chris you went too far.” and “Chris you should have attacked her.” The former would lend some amount of consideration to him and his situation while the latter is the opening of a flood gate to launch all sorts of attacks, accusations, and lord knows what else.

              I’m all for getting into the why behind him saying such things but it seems like there is a desire to cut everything away until, “Because he hates women and its okay to say such things to women.” is the only thing left.

          • “But I think we also need to see it a step deeper and realize that when a guy tells a woman whom he obviously dislikes, who clearly HATES him, to engage in a sexual act, he’s obviously talking about sexual assault. She wouldn’t WANT to do it, right? And yet he is saying, “suck my dick” – that’s pretty forceful.”
            I’ve said it before to males n females with no intention of wanting them anywhere near my dick (and yes they were real assholes who’ve said the same n worse and no I don’t feel guilty over it). It’s just an automatic fuck you type speech here without much thought. If I hate someone enough to say it with intent of anger then I’d never want them near my dick and they wouldn’t deserve the chance to. When I say it, it’s like kiss my ass, but I don’t want them to kiss it. If they tried they’d cop a fist to the head.

            So I’m not so sure it’s goin to always be sexually based from a man to a woman even if he hates her. People say all kinds of horrible shit without meaning it, I’ve told people to fuckoff n die, told em I hope they get fat, hope karma bites em in the ass. I mean very little of it. I can see why people would think Chris is implying sexual abuse but it’s entirely possible he’s only physically abusive in his life, not all physical abusers rape, etc. More proof of this is when homophobic assholes say “suck my dick, faggot”, obviously they don’t want a male to suck their dick. I know the woman that said “suck my C***” doesn’t want me to go down town since she was angry at me.

            I think the term has just become so popular but in my cases has no real meaning of actually implying someone to suck their dick just as people saying “I’ll kill you” most of the time don’t reach for the 12gauge. Obviously it’s a fucked up thing to say, and something that can be taken many ways but as much as he’s an asshole I just have a doubt that he is trying to imply sexual abuse. I could be wrong of course. Growing up in a rural area that has people swear a lot I’ve done my listening and have noticed that many of us say absolute bullshit out of anger, stuff we don’t actually mean and stuff that can be very extreme.

            I think people are far more comfortable throwing words around as they don’t make a physically visible impact and are thus seen as safe. Sure they’ll ruffle feathers but I don’t think many realize the power of the words, and when the stuff becomes so common it can desensitize people to it. Like I’ve heard people say “I wanna kill X” probably 1000 times, what they mean is they are angry as hell at X. So I guess when I hear “suck my dick” to me it sounds more like a fuck you vs an attempt to portray a real blowjob forced.

    • Joanna Schroeder says:

      Also, this tweet from Brown blew my mind “Just ask Rihanna if she mad” – maybe you were saying above that you DO think that’s too far, I wasn’t clear, but to me that’s INSANE. I literally believe he has a mental illness that needs to be treated, if he believes that was appropriate.

      https://twitter.com/JennyJohnsonHi5/status/272876629963980800

      • I literally believe he has a mental illness that needs to be treated, if he believes that was appropriate.
        And I guess poking at him when its well known how he will react passes for therapy now?

        • It isn’t about helping him. He can afford therapy. He should not get a free pass to say some truly sexist and awful things because he may or may not have a mental illness and we should be afraid of provoking him…that sends a terrible message to the rabid fans of his who think what is “sick” in all this is that people talk about what he did, not what he actually did, or the fact that he continues to show he has not changed. Seriously, go do a twitter search for “chris brown can beat me” – it’s disheartening.

          Poking at him doesn’t make much of a difference, but it does send a message to the many young girls and men who are also listening to this that beating women, and showing a total lack of remorse by saying “go ask rihanna…” or any of the other things he tweeted about defecating in her mouth, sucking his dick, etc, is NOT acceptable. Not ok. Not funny, not justified for any reason. He is not the victim here.

          • John Anderson says:

            That’s why they can’t stop prison rape. Too many people think that if you commit a crime it’s OK to abuse you. No one here is defending what Chris Brown did, but many people feel that if he’s living in peace, he should be left in peace. Read the tweet that she was initially responding to. Who was he abusing?

            • Good point. If Brown is such a horrible person that believes such horrible things then why continue giving him the time of day to the point that it is okay to provoke such responses?

              As I said below there are way too many instances where such responses are given in a truly unprovoked manner (in fact I bet there are examples where Brown actually did take the first shot at someone with some sort of terrible remark).

              It’s one thing when this type of behavior comes out on its own. Its quite another when people go out of their way to set off this behavior. And no I’m not saying that makes what he said okay. What I am saying is that this is setting up the notion that since he (or someone like him) will react in such a nasty manner it’s okay to provoke them and then try to make a big deal about the way they react.

              If he’s so damn terrible then let him go in a corner and die.

            • “That’s why they can’t stop prison rape. Too many people think that if you commit a crime it’s OK to abuse you. No one here is defending what Chris Brown did, but many people feel that if he’s living in peace, he should be left in peace. Read the tweet that she was initially responding to. Who was he abusing?”
              I’d love to know from the haters of Chris Brown if you’d accept a man doing what she did, to a female who beat her boyfriend? If she said “suck my C***” to him, would you consider that to be threatening him with sexual assault of forced oral sex?

            • John Anderson says:

              Or any kind of abuse. Can people just send her messages calling her a c+nt? What if they wanted to insult her looks? Would that cross the line or because she beat her boyfriend, it’s fair game? Would that be acceptable, because that’s what I’m hearing? If Chris Brown had actually done something offensive in that initial tweet, I could see her response, but he did nothing so it’s just harassment on her part.


          • It isn’t about helping him. He can afford therapy.

            Oh I’m sure he can. I’m having a problem with poking at him when knowing full well how he would react and then going on about how he needs he needs treatment.

            He should not get a free pass to say some truly sexist and awful things because he may or may not have a mental illness and we should be afraid of provoking him…that sends a terrible message to the rabid fans of his who think what is “sick” in all this is that people talk about what he did, not what he actually did, or the fact that he continues to show he has not changed.
            Who said anything about giving him a free pass?

            Seriously, go do a twitter search for “chris brown can beat me” – it’s disheartening.
            I know what you’re talking. A while back after some awards show there was a kick off of women tweeting that brown can beat them anytime. There were even tweets from people asking why anyone in Rihanna’s position would be mad about what he did (in fact I even did a post on it).

            He is not the victim here.
            Who said he was the victim?

      • Also, this tweet from Brown blew my mind “Just ask Rihanna if she mad” – maybe you were saying above that you DO think that’s too far, I wasn’t clear, but to me that’s INSANE. I literally believe he has a mental illness that needs to be treated, if he believes that was appropriate.

        So if the conclusion is that he has to be mentally impaired – INSANE – I wonder why he is being criticised and not the people using that Impairment for notoriety and amusement? Someone on twitter goes after the mentally impaired guy to provoke a response so they can laugh at it and provide amusement for associates?

        If that pattern happened in the play ground I could see so many kids lined up outside of the principles office – and parents being asked if they grasp the idea of Zero Tolerance…. and being worried about how their home lives were being viewed.

        Why use twitter when you could just strip him naked, have him on a chain and get him to dance in a Circus Side show for nickels and dimes? Odd aint it – venues change but the behaviour does not!

  4. In most states I believe calling one such names is considered simple assault, and would be a crime which would violate someone’s probation. Especially if they were on probation for…oh, let’s say assaulting your girlfriend for example…http://ht.ly/fz2hE

    • John Anderson says:

      In many state there are other things called fighting words. Words intended to generate a physical response. That falls under self defense. I don’t know that being on probation for anything invalidates a person’s right to self defense.

      • I do not think you understand the fighting words doctrine, nor what assault is. Her tweet would not cause a reasonable apprehension of offensive or harmful physical contact. His might. Big difference.

        Either way, “fighting words” is not an excuse or justification for self defense, though he could probably try to sue her (and likely be laughed out of court). Please learn how to use the world of information literally at your fingertips before you spread misinformation and ignorance.

        • @Michele

          Either way, “fighting words” is not an excuse or justification for self defense, though he could probably try to sue her (and likely be laughed out of court). Please learn how to use the world of information literally at your fingertips before you spread misinformation and ignorance.

          Og Boy! I take it you are familiar with the ongoing research into the net + Gender +Abuse/Violence/Stalking etc?

          NO? P^/

          What a Surprise!

          Maybe you need to catch up with the very strong evidence of how gender alters perceptions of abuse on the net, and worse just how Abuse Patterns and Manipulation are gendered! Look at such things as the ECHO project and professional Criminological and Sociological investigation and research. So many apple carts and tropes are being upset.

          It’s amazing how many see their keyboards and interfaces as a bubble of personal and not public space, and as a result so much keeps leaking out and revealing so much.

          I can see two patterns here being played with. 1) CB has bad name and racially negative profile 2) JJ nasty Girl who has need for power and public affirmation goads to get a warm fuzzy feeling plus positive racial profile to her followers and admirers.

          There are even racial issues here – with how language gets used and presented.

          It all gets to look highly exploitative very quickly – and I have to say that whilst I was quite literally unaware of this Chris Brown or Jenny Johnson, as you go looking at what is available on-line, I have to say that neither is a saint, and whilst CB has a history that is automatically seen as negative (On Multiple fronts including race) JJ has quite a history and even notoriety for exploiting others to create interest. Oddly there seem to be race issues there too as the profile of her followers are Caucasian female of a certain age.

          Fighting words may be absent – but I have to say that either being Ignorant of provocation and threat is gendered and how that operates via the net is either a display of academic ignorance and reality, or feigned.

        • John Anderson says:

          “There are certain well-defined and narrowly limited classes of speech, the prevention and punishment of which have never been thought to raise any constitutional problem. These include the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous, and the insulting or “fighting words” those that by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace. It has been well observed that such utterances are no essential part of any exposition of ideas, and are of such slight social value as a step to truth that any benefit that may be derived from them is clearly outweighed by the social interest in order and morality.

          — Chaplinsky v. New Hampshire, 1942″

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fighting_words#Chaplinsky_decision

          “include the lewd and obscene, the profane, the libelous, and the insulting ”

          I’d say it was insulting if nothing else.

          “by their very utterance inflict injury ”

          So, you’re suggesting that someone doesn’t have the right to defend themselves against someone attempting to inflict injury or are you suggesting that she wasn’t trying to hurt Chris Brown with these particular words.

          Doctrine of self defense

          “Justification does not make a criminal use of force lawful; if the use of force is justified, it cannot be criminal at all: Dennis J. Baker, Glanville Williams Textbook of Criminal Law (London: 2012) at Chapter 21. ”

          “The ownership and possession of property confer a certain right to defend that possession, [including] a defense of it which results in an assault and battery, and that which results in the destruction of the means used to invade and interfere with that possession.”[4]”

          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_of_self-defense

          Theoretically he has the right to defend his own tweets. Did he use excessive force to defend it? That’s currently being debated, but rule of thumb suggests that if it didn’t deter her, then it was not excessive.

          “Johnson, who is often cited as one of the funniest presences on Twitter, has poked fun at Brown ever since his 2009 arrest”

          http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/25/chris-browns-vulgar-twitter-attack-on-jenny-johnson-comedy-writer_n_2188841.html#slide=1799817

          So she’s been basically messing with him since 2009. Maybe she stops, but probably not.

          Sound like a stretch. Not any more than Chris Brown digitizing himself and going across the internet to sexually assault someone he hasn’t physically attacked in the three years she’s been messing with him.

  5. That moment when white privilege wins yet again. Granted if i were Chris Brown I would have ignored the ignorant lady, but this is a prime example of how responding to critics gets you painted as the sexist angry Black man. Jenny Johnson is not a victim in this situation, she responded expecting a fight, and unfortunately Chris gave her one and got the burnt end of the stick.

    • Joanna Schroeder says:

      But seriously, why is her challenge to his morality and character responded to with sexual violence.

      I really want to know why that’s an okay escalation?

      • TheCeeJayLouis says:

        Frankly, I don’t think you know much about this generation if you’re truly shocked that he told a heckling comedian to “suck his dick.” That or you’re biased. Female or not, it’s a general derogative in pop culture, so your question doesn’t really make sense. It’s not about sexual violence, don’t equate his past to all of his future actions; it’s an extremely bias and inaccurate way to view people.

        And, clearly, his referring to Rihanna was to make the point that his victim has forgiven him, so why can’t a far removed and completely unassociated random get over it? Any logical person would make that point.

        Btw, I know you are biased since you interpret her quip implying that he is physically unattractive because of what he did as a challenge to his morality and character. It certainly was by no means that and even if it was a civil gripe, it would have been unwarranted and so she prompted a response well-deserved. A moment of weakness doesn’t deserve such continuous scorn; he’s received his sentence a thousand times over and any more of this sort of judgment doesn’t really help, so I don’t think defending online assaults are a just cause in this matter.

        • Cheating on your partner is a moment of weakness. Beating the shit out of them is assault.

          He hasn’t paid for his crime. Anyone else would have been sent to prison for what he did. But more importantly, people still defend this asshole and support him. He should have been run out of show business, but people still support this dude as a cultural icon.

          You can obfuscate and try to prove how Chris Brown saying “eat a dick” is the same as anyone else saying it. Chris Brown getting a tattoo on his neck that looks like Rihanna isn’t the same as anyone else getting it. Chris brown talking about sexual violence, especially to a woman, is not the same as anyone else doing it. Chris Brown going crazy on someone out of anger isn’t the same as anyone else doing it. Chris Brown intentionally talking about the woman he beat to within an inch of her life to win an argument is not excusable, in any context. What’s wrong with you? How do you not understand that it’s not about being provoked? Who cares if he was provoked? He’s supposed to be spending his time convincing us beyond any shadow of a doubt that he would never do something like he did to Rihanna ever again. Instead all he’s showing us is that he’s still a petulant child with a man’s body who’s not afraid of using any means at his disposal to hurt the people who challenge him.

          • You can obfuscate and try to prove how Chris Brown saying “eat a dick” is the same as anyone else saying it. Chris Brown getting a tattoo on his neck that looks like Rihanna isn’t the same as anyone else getting it. Chris brown talking about sexual violence, especially to a woman, is not the same as anyone else doing it. Chris Brown going crazy on someone out of anger isn’t the same as anyone else doing it. Chris Brown intentionally talking about the woman he beat to within an inch of her life to win an argument is not excusable, in any context. What’s wrong with you?

            Well it would seem that a great number of people people are just Culturally Ignorant Cluster Fucks who have failed to grasp just how Unique this Mr Brown is in the scope of all humanity on a Global Scale. The way some are talking about his significance is Biblical to the point where I have wonder who is coming for the second time?

            I’ve been looking at his name and profile on-line and comparing his with a few other Cultural Icons. Google must must be broken because he is less Googley relevant that The Queen – Queen (As in Mr Mercury etal) – Obama – Elton John – Tom and Jerry – and even Justin Beiber and Usama Bin laden!

            It is evident from what you have typed that what ever this Mr Brown does has such a massive cultural and social impact upon the globe and all who happen to be there, I have to wonder why Myself and so many others known Sweet F A About him?

            Maybe it’s because we aint Twits – entertained by Farcebook – and believe that pixels of people we will never meet ( and for that matter have little to no interest of ever meeting ) really are not that significant that we need to remove our Knickers and twist them in public until they squeak!


            • Chris Brown intentionally talking about the woman he beat to within an inch of her life to win an argument is not excusable, in any context.

              I guess that’s why a few months after Brown attacked Rihanna when Mary J Blige hit her husband and followed by saying, “What are you gonna do, Chris Brown me?” it became such a big mess and people were all over it right?

            • First I’ve heard of that….good job Aussie media. As a sidenote, I heard Rihanna hit him first, was she also charged with DV? AFAIK if both have been at it, both are meant to get charged?

            • Oh you live outside the States? Not surprising the first bit that you never heard about it considering that most people here in the States never heard about it. When I did mention it all I got in return was accusation that I was trying to claim that what she did was just as bad as what Brown did.

              I just can’t help but notice that the only time people want to get serious about partner violence is when its male against female partner violence. Other variations don’t count apparently.

          • John Anderson says:

            “Cheating on your partner is a moment of weakness. Beating the shit out of them is assault.”

            Too bad for Tiger Woods, that doesn’t seem to be consistently applied.

            http://larrybrownsports.com/golf/tiger-woods-beat-up-hit-bloodied-wife-elin-nordegren/11433

            “[Tiger] said his wife had confronted him about reports that he was seeing another woman. The argument got heated and, according to our source, she scratched his face up. We’re told it was then Woods beat a hasty retreat for his SUV — but according to our source, Woods says his wife followed behind with a golf club. As Tiger drove away, she struck the vehicle several times with the club.”

      • I really want to know why that’s an okay escalation?
        When people escalate they often do so for one purpose.

        To offend, scare, or otherwise harm the other person.

        She made that comment knowing full well what Brown was capable of. That doesn’t make it okay but honestly I wonder if you asking this is an attempt to deflect from the fact that she again made that comment knowing full well what would happen.

        • I’ll grant her tweet was rude. But that doesn’t excuse in the least his comment, which simply proves he hasn’t learned a thing in the last couple of years. If he had integrity as a human being (read: wasn’t ACTUALLY a piece of s***), he wouldn’t have responded by escalating with an age/gender sexual violence reference. There are hundreds of other possible responses he could have made that would have pointed out her nastiness (which, in retrospect looks pretty accurate).

          • Joanna is asking why did he do it and why is it being seen as okay (and given the context of this specific situation, I was originally inclined to say it was okay but I have rethought that).

            I think he did it because he was looking to hurt her and others are seeing it as okay because she provoked him.

            In other words Jenny wanted a rude reaction and went after someone that would almost certainly give it to her. Probably so that instead of calling her on her rudeness the discussion would get turned into why did he say such mean things to her.

            If he had integrity as a human being (read: wasn’t ACTUALLY a piece of s***), he wouldn’t have responded by escalating with an age/gender sexual violence reference.
            And if she had any integrity as a human being she wouldn’t have opened with such offensive volley.

            The fact that he responded like that doesn’t excuse her own behavior because if she hadn’t fired first then he wouldn’t fired back.

            Like I say to Joanna below I think this might not be the best example to bring up the question of why people resort to sexual innuendo towards women.

            People go on and on about how damaged Brown is and how unchanged he is and how terrible he is and all that.

            If he is so terrible why do people keep giving him the time of day? Why not let him fade into obscurity instead of conveniently bringing him up when they need some quick publicity?

            • Joanna Schroeder says:

              That’s what thinking people wonder every day – WHY are people giving this disgusting, violent, unbalanced pig the time of day?

              Because for some reason, threatening sexual violence is okay with this society. We need to take a moment and look at this. Look at ourselves. So she leveled a horrible attack at him by calling him a piece of shit.

              Thing is, when guys say “Suck my dick” or “bend over and take it” or “I’ll fuck you in the ass” (which is what one guy said to me when I asked him to leave the store I was working in) to women, it is to SCARE them. It is to make them afraid of being raped.

              They may not realize that’s what’s being said when they say, “Suck my dick” but when you’re talking to someone who HATES you and telling them to suck your dick, you’re playing the role of a rapist, commanding his victim to do something she doesn’t want to do.

              If he said, “Fuck you, Bitch, you worthless piece of trash” I wouldn’t have had problems with it. She initiated THAT conversation.

              But “suck my dick” is intended to scare and shut a woman up by threatening sexual violence and any man that said it to me I would consider dangerous.


            • That’s what thinking people wonder every day – WHY are people giving this disgusting, violent, unbalanced pig the time of day?

              A question that apparently some thinking people are willing to put on the back burner when it comes to getting some free publicity.


              But “suck my dick” is intended to scare and shut a woman up by threatening sexual violence and any man that said it to me I would consider dangerous.

              Again if he is so dangerous then why mess with him in the first place? Despite Michelle trying to tell me what I’m saying in this post I really wonder what the deal is with this back and forth between, “Oh he’s a jerk don’t waste time on him.” and “Oh, I’m going to provoke him into saying something horrible.”

              I have an idea why they do so. Due to the horrible things Brown has done Johnson thought that she could take a free shot at him and if he did react she could count on people letting the fact that she initiated it get lost in the tide of, “Chris Brown is the most horrible person ever!”.

              Yeah I can appreciate you wanting to get deeper than this exact instance of Johnson and Brown. Maybe this wasn’t the best instance to use as a jump point for that deeper discussion?

            • “Because for some reason, threatening sexual violence is okay with this society. We need to take a moment and look at this. Look at ourselves. So she leveled a horrible attack at him by calling him a piece of shit.”
              Society seems to be ok with all kinds of violent language, “I wanna kill my boss/gf/dog/etc” is soooo common. She calls him a piece of shit, an act which would be verbal abuse and is a tactic which is used regularly in domestic violence that can be used to destroy someones self esteem. Is that really much better than saying “suck my dick”? He’s done a bad thing, does he deserve abuse?

              “But “suck my dick” is intended to scare and shut a woman up by threatening sexual violence and any man that said it to me I would consider dangerous.”
              Calling someone a piece of shit is degrading them, bullies do it too. It’s not just a threat but an actual attack so why is SMD worse for you? What she said can often come with violence, the word’s “fuck you” gets me on edge ready to defend myself as I’ve seen it come with fists. To me I see both of them in the wrong, I don’t see what he said as worse though as abuse is abuse. SMD isn’t always intended to scare people or to even threaten sexual violence though, never have I used it in such a manner even when I’ve told people I hate to SMD. I’ve had a woman say the same to me, I didn’t sense it as a threat of sexual violence but just a big fuck-you. It doesn’t even have to imply force, it sounds a bit like you are seeing the threat of sexual violence when the intention may not be there. By that logic when I said it to a woman you must think I am dangerous and that I threatened her with sexual violence when I was simply telling her “fuck you” as she was a reallllll bitch n said some horrible nasty shit. I say that to my friends and they say it to me, eg when making a joke to a friend saying they suck at woodwork I’ll probably hear an SMD thrown back at me and we laugh. I don’t say anything like I’ll rape you, I’ll force you to suck my cock, etc.

        • So Danny, what you are saying is that: if a woman knows a man is capable of escalating to that point, she should have known better than to open her mouth. Got it. Thank god you are here to logic that one out for us.

          And no, the point is the fact he used that specific KIND of insult shows what he thinks of women, his character, and that Johnson’s original tweet was completely accurate.

          There is no need to attack someone with insults threatening them with sexual violence. Are you really not getting this? There is no reason to expect someone will respond to something rude you say with *threats of sexual violence*

          jfc.

          • So Danny, what you are saying is that: if a woman knows a man is capable of escalating to that point, she should have known better than to open her mouth. Got it. Thank god you are here to logic that one out for us.
            No I’m saying that the fact that such an escalation is possible doesn’t give one a free pass to provoke.

            And no, the point is the fact he used that specific KIND of insult shows what he thinks of women, his character, and that Johnson’s original tweet was completely accurate.
            Again if he is such a terrible person then why poke at him in the first place? If her remark is so accurate then why bother going at him about it?

            There is no need to attack someone with insults threatening them with sexual violence.
            Not trying to say there is.

          • There is no need to attack someone with insults threatening them with sexual violence

            I’d say there is no need to attack someone with insults. Period.

            • Joanna Schroeder says:

              So, all attacks are equal? Threats of sexual violence are equal with everything else?

            • Calling someone a piece of shit is verbal abuse, and is often used in domestic violence with extremely damaging effects. I can see you’re trying to make sexual assault sound worse than what she said but 1, saying SMD isn’t automatically implying he’s threatening her with sexual assault, 2, what she said can be highly damaging too although usually done over a longer period of time. Abuse is abuse is abuse, making one seem worse is a bit silly don’t you think? He’s not actually saying I’ll fuck your ass, he said suck my dick, not I’ll force you to suck my dick. SMD is too loose a term to automatically mean forced oral sex. It’s sexual violence, but doesn’t have to be threat of one, since it already has triggered the sexual violence.

            • John Anderson says:

              “what she said can be highly damaging too although usually done over a longer period of time.”

              According to the story, she did it over 3 years.

  6. I do not believe that qualifies as sexual violence, sexist verbal abuse sure. But here is my question, what exactly was her reasoning for responding? Knowing their past interactions and what his responses would be, she did nothing more than bait him. Yes, he was stupid for taking the bait, but i’m sorry, she does not get to play damsel in distress here, and the fact that everyone is jumping down his throat proves my point. They were both in the wrong, but the story has not been articulated as such, she instigated the situaiton, got the response she was looking for, and is now riding the media wave of being the white woman verbally absused by the “angry violent Black guy”. Give me a break!

    • Joanna Schroeder says:

      I don’t disagree that it’s about publicity. Her job as a comedy writer is to be a provocateur on Twitter by poking at guys like Brown.

      But again, why does it become about her blowing him anyway? I don’t get this.

      I get why he attacked her back. I do, and she should’ve known it would happen (even this way) and I do NOT see her as a damsel in distress, but I do think his responses represent a way in which his only response is to devalue/humiliate her sexually.

      And the the “ask Rihanna” response is deeply troubling.

      • Not sure I buy into the whole “white privilege” slant either. How does that all play into what happened with Rhianna, Jenny Johnson, fighting with Drake or awaiting the word of the court in January? Celebrity does indeed have it’s benefits. I am pretty sure I couldn’t go to finish my “european” business and deal with the judge when it is convenient for my schedule if I had allegedly violated my probation. The problem seems to be more celebrity privilege rather than oppressive white privilege. Mr Brown obviously thinks he can do , act, or say anything he chooses, with or without forethought and with impunity. That is not okay…for anyone of any race, creed, color, gender, age, or any subset thereof.

        • TheCeeJayLouis says:

          I don’t see any valid points made by you, Jack, especially in absence of knowledge of what happened at each of these unrelated incidents of which none had Brown as the instigator. There is not any evidence which supports your point within that paragraph you wrote. Brown is not drunk with celebrity privilege; as far as it seems, he’s a young man who is is growing up in the public eye. That’s it. His reactions are normal.

          • What I DO know first hand is that in most states , who the instigator is doesn’t matter, its the violation of the law. I DO know that for offenses as simple as running a stop light people have had their probation and parole violated., Most people who are not celebrities, especially young, aren’t allowed to leave the state much less the country. I don’t need evidence for those things, I’ve lived them. AND seen them thousands of times. As far as evidence goes, the courts found him guilty enough to put him on probation, and require anger management classes. Just like anyone else, he got a second chance, and has apparently taken advantage of that. His fight with Drake and the new twitter fight are well documented as were his probation revocation hearing. Of course I don’t know exactly what happened. I doubt anyone does except the ones present. However public displays make it easy to see Chris Brown is not some helpless little boy reacting normally. There is nothing normal about celebrity. He does win however. We are STILL talking about him.

            • John Anderson says:

              Celebrities get treated differently that’s true. They usually, but don’t always get treated better. Celebrities are also targets. Just off the top of my head I remember Michael Jordan, Rick Pitino, and David Letterman being the targets of extortion from women they had sex with. I suspect that these women would have lodged false rape accusations against these men followed by civil suits, but opted instead for extortion. These are essentially unreported false rape accusations.

              A good society tries to protect the most vulnerable. We have tougher laws when children, the elderly and disabled are victimized because we know that they’re targets. Law enforcement might use their discretionary power to treat celebrities differently because they realize that they are more likely to be targeted as Chris Brown was by Jenny Johnson.

        • If Jenny Johnson were Tamika Johnson, would this post even be on Good Men Project?

          • Joanna Schroeder says:

            I think that’s a GREAT question, and being as I was the editor who wrote the above post I can say conclusively…

            Maybe.

            I wish I could say “yes” but what makes this story noteworthy is not just what he said to Johnson, but the fact that his account was deactivated, apparently because of this exchange. If he hadn’t have deactivated it (or maybe Twitter did? I can’t tell), I wouldn’t have noticed the conversation, as I hate Chris Brown. I hate what the did to Rihanna, and even more so, I hate his apparent lack of growth, regret or repentance for the act. So I actively avoid his Twitter because “Team Breezy” makes me depressed about the state of our society.

            However, him having his VERY popular Twitter account deactivated did draw my attention.

            So the question is this – if Tamika Johnson had challenged him as Jenny did, would there have been such an outcry that he would have deactivated his account, or had it suspended? I can’t answer that because I wasn’t in charge of that. Of course, the way that Black women are marginalized compared with white women, I wouldn’t be shocked if it had gone largely ignored.

            But I think there are multiple factors that caused Jenny’s twitter exchange for him to be considered so important, one being her large following on Twitter, another being her appearance (blonde, white, pretty) and another being that her responses were clever.

            I think Danny’s right, this is about publicity for her, too. That’s why people are on Twitter – publicity.

            So basically, I can’t answer that question perfectly, or as perfectly as I wish I could. I can say conclusively, however, that had his account been deactivated because of this exchange – regardless of whether she was a Jenny or a Tamika – it would’ve landed right here, just as it is.

            • ?I wish I could say “yes” but what makes this story noteworthy is not just what he said to Johnson, but the fact that his account was deactivated, apparently because of this exchange.

              P^) – not sure that this claim is correct – or rather if the language is valid – it has ambiguity stamped all over it. I’m no expert on This man or Twitter – I did have an account, but got fed up with people updating me on bowl motions and the price of eggs.

              All the references I have found to this event where they say anything beyond the account being deactivated all state that CB deactivated the account – and not twitter. There are only two ways to close an account on Twitter – by choice or by Twitter doing it under strict guidelines…. and none of those guidelines appear to have been breached by any publicly available sources.

              Saying his account was deactivated reads as he did not do it himself – therefore it was done by second party – Twitter – implying sanction. That’s misleading and can distort both perceptions and dialogue.

              Just needs to be made clear. Closed account means only closed account and any indication or intimation beyond that is not supported by any public domain information.

            • But I think there are multiple factors that caused Jenny’s twitter exchange for him to be considered so important, one being her large following on Twitter, another being her appearance (blonde, white, pretty) and another being that her responses were clever.
              And her gender. I’m almost wiling to hypothesize that if Jenny had been Jerry and the tweets went down like this either there wouldn’t have been much of a problem over the implications of sexual violence or people would have still raised the objections but instead of talking about male against male sexual violence it STILL would have been about male against female sexual violence somehow.

      • I get why he attacked her back. I do, and she should’ve known it would happen (even this way) and I do NOT see her as a damsel in distress, but I do think his responses represent a way in which his only response is to devalue/humiliate her sexually.
        Probably because in this instance where all he really knows is that she is white and she is a woman that was the easiest thing to go for. Kind of like when random guys do bad things and it’s open season on calling them dicks (which despite all the bleating I hear about gendered insults this one seems to get a seal of approval even in spaces where “bitch” towards jerkish women and “pussy” towards cowardice are rightly challenged) or people call for their genitals to get cut off.

        • Please stop with the irrelevant generalizations. Not all of us women who “bleat” about “bitch” and “pussy” think that threatening genital mutilation is ok. Equality is equality. Thank god I do not have the same friends you do, you seem to know some terrible people.

          To borrow your example, in this case, if chris brown had told jenny johnson that she was a worthless piece of shit, and she responded by saying she was going to cut off (whatever), that would be SIMILAR to what he said. Different because dv and rape culture affects women disproportionately, but, it’s a horrifying escalation regardless.

          It’s important to remember *why* people seem to complain more about language directed towards women, and it isn’t because men’s lives are policed by the threat of gender violence and a culture that supports it. Not that it’s ok, just that the language itself isn’t the issue or why people care, it’s the culture it creates that is. Which is exactly why his tweets are most disturbing to me, personally. Saying resistance to sexism is disproportionate but not caring about the disproportionate effects of sexism that the resistance is a direct response to is just ignorant.

          It wasn’t the “easiest” thing to go for, it wasn’t even relevant, but it is very telling he took it there.

          • Please stop with the irrelevant generalizations. Not all of us women who “bleat” about “bitch” and “pussy” think that threatening genital mutilation is ok. Equality is equality. Thank god I do not have the same friends you do, you seem to know some terrible people.
            What makes you think I’m talking about friends? And I don’t recall saying anything about all women (I don’t even recall saying women period) thinking this way. Please stop hearing generalizations where they are none.

            To borrow your example, in this case, if chris brown had told jenny johnson that she was a worthless piece of shit, and she responded by saying she was going to cut off (whatever), that would be SIMILAR to what he said. Different because dv and rape culture affects women disproportionately, but, it’s a horrifying escalation regardless.
            For the record if Johnson had a similar track record of bad behavior I’d again be asking if she is such a terrible person then why bother messing with her in the first place.

            It wasn’t the “easiest” thing to go for, it wasn’t even relevant, but it is very telling he took it there.
            Why do you think I said it was the easiest thing to go for? Because he took advantage of the very culture you’re speaking of. Not trying to say it’s right or anything like that.

            Maybe you think I’m trying to give Brown a free pass on his behavior.

            I’m not.

          • ….rape culture affects women disproportionately….

            Oh Joy – someone who is ignorant of stats – facts and has a Skipping Trope to play with. It’s so odd how for some culture has to be so gendered.

            Rape culture is a concept of unknown origin and of uncertain definition; yet it has made its way into everyday vocabulary and is assumed to be commonly understood. – Blackwell Encyclopedia of Sociology Online

            Assumed to be commonly understood? Oh how true that is … it’s so very odd – even extremely queer!

            Odd too how the Term Rape Culture comes from the Work of The DC Rape Crisis Centre, founded by Black Women – and their ground-breaking and pioneering work with Prisoners from Lorton Prison … all Black Men and the one’s you created that Not for Profit “Prisoners Against Rape Inc.”. Odd too how the work of Prisoners Against Rape and the concerns of Rape Culture even made it before congressional committees investigating rape and sexual violence …. but aint it odd or beyond Queer that no-one can find the original evidence and yet it seems to be the only thing missing from the files.

            Skipping Tropes indeed. It’s odd how many claim that the term and what it means comes from White Voices and White books. Is it that it’s “assumed to be commonly understood.”? Or is it that some understand and think the origins far too common and below indifference?

  7. John Anderson says:

    I think as a personal rule, people should expect to be treated the same way they treat others. From what I can tell, Jenny Johnson started with the vulgarities calling him a piece of shit. Had she said beating on women instead, then I would have no sympathy for Chris Brown. I don’t like having sympathy for Chris Brown. Thanks a lot, Jenny.

  8. Honestly I think Chief Keef is worse. He celebrated the death of another Chiraq youth and has had his instagram deleted at least twice (3 times actually). Once for showing a picture of him getting a blowjob and another time for bringing the strip club home. Unfortunately it ain’t just the “bitches” who love Sosa so he has some staying power.

  9. Joanna,

    When someone wants to offend or hurt another person they reach for something that they are sure will hurt. In light of not having actual personal details about Jenny Johnson he chose to go after a gender based attack because he concluded it to be something that he could reach for in order to hurt her with.

    So to answer your question, he went there because he wanted to hurt her.

    Take a man/woman couple that is arguing. He says something that hurts her so she goes into insulting his sexual prowess. Why? Because she wants to hurt him.

    Take a man/woman couple that is arguing. She says something that hurts him so he goes into insulting her weight. Why Because he wants to hurt her.

    Now to bring this full circle Jenny Johnson knew good and hell well that Brown had a track record of such behavior so she poked at him. And even if what he said in return didn’t actually hurt her she COUNTED on him reacting that way in order to get some free quick publicity. And I think the fact that she counted on such a reaction is why people don’t feel for her, and that might be getting in the way of your attempt at discussion here.

    You are asking a valid question. I think you’re just using a bad example to ask it.

    What we need is a true example of a woman being innocently bombarded with such insults. And given how many, “Why are women treated so harshly for the crime of daring to speak up?” articles that are floating around the net I’m sure there are better ones. Thousands of examples of women that actually are attacked unprovoked with sexual remarks and this question comes up in one instance where it was anything but unprovoked?

  10. xmaseveeve says:

    Why are some people trying to bring race into this? This man has demonstrated that he is out of control, and has a real problem with women, and with anger. Women are not safe around him.

    • John Anderson says:

      The reason why is because is precisely what you said.

      “Women are not safe around him.”

      Yet, we have a woman who felt entitled enough to attack him without provocation and expected to be protected by society. The tweet she initially responded to was innocent by what I can tell.

  11. I remember a few years ago Kathy Griffin was doing a New Years Eve show (I think) and someone was ragging on her, telling her to get off stage. She responded by saying, “I don’t take the dick out of your mouth when you’re doing your job, so don’t interrupt me when I’m doing mine.”

    So is such escalation always a problem or only a problem when its done to women?

  12. You know who’s getting none of the blame for this? Twitter itself. I get that it and other social media are here to stay, and occasionally they serve some useful purpose, but mostly I think these modes of communication cause more harm than good. Minor insults or squabbles that would blow over without notice in the past are treated as if they’re meaningful and important, just because the technology exists for a few thousand or more people to witness every little thing. Fleeting moments of anger or poor judgment get treated as evidence of what total shits people are, until eventually everyone has their turns so everyone is a total shit. The downside of everyone being a broadcaster is that it makes everyone else a critic of the reality show their life turns into.

    I have to go shake a stick at some kids on my lawn now. Damn punks with their tiny Walkmans and wires dripping out their ears. Why, when I was their age…

    • …Walkmans…
      [offtopic]
      walkmans were so damn cool, the size of a brick, but works-of-80s-art. i used to drool over them, and when they added the auto reverse mechanism to the cassette player – wooah, next stop, ‘back to the future’ hoverboards babie
      i wonder if they are hipster cool now, like typewriters

  13. “take them teeth out when u Sucking my dick HOE.”
    Is this considered sexual violence or verbal abuse? I’ve had the “suck my dick bitch/faggot/fuckhead/asshole/fatfuck/C***/asshole/dickhead” said to me so many times but I thought it was just simply verbal abuse? Hell my friends even say it to me in a bullshit manner. Are my friends being sexually violent to me?

    • Reminds me of Demi Moore in GI Jane telling the Master Chief to “Suck Her Dick”!

      I wonder how that should all be contextualised – is Demi going trans – Being Sexist in claiming she has genitals she does not – or is she expressing high level of displeasure at another persons contempt and provocation?

      It’s one thing having banter between friends – and quite another someone you don’t know. I feel so inadequate not being Clairvoyant, Clairaudient, Clairesentient and so globally disconnected and unable to travel in time. So many just see a pixel and are able to know so much about other people. I wish I had those basic powers and abilities. It’s terrible when so many others have them, use them so publically, are able to speak with such absolute authority by just tuning in to other people via a set of tweets.

      Some of us still have to do the old fashioned thing and getting them to come round and have a cup of tea! P^)

      • To be honest I googled it as I didn’t realize it was considered sexual violence, I thought of it more as just general fucktardness with verbal abuse. I hear it soooo often, the shit my friends n I say to each other can be pretty vile but I’m curious if when I say “suck my dick” to a friend is it actually violent if my intentions are to jest and they do the same? Does it need an intent behind it to become verbally n sexually abusive?

        • Joanna Schroeder says:

          As I said above, Archy, follow this logically:

          A woman HATES you, she thinks you’re worthless.

          Your response (if you’re Chris Brown) is to tell her to suck your dick.

          Take the commonplace nature of this term and forget it for a moment. What does it mean? It means that a man is telling a woman who doesn’t like him that she is supposed to perform a sexual act on him.

          That’s sexual assault. It’s intended to be scary, degrading and offensive. It doesn’t make her his opponent in a verbal fight, it makes her his victim.

          And while people joke about terrible things with their friends, knowing they’re your friends changes things.

          As a commenter above notes, it’s also different coming from Chris Brown, who should be trying to prove to society that he’s not a dangerous, violent criminal. I wouldn’t like it from anyone, but it’s 10x worse from Brown. Especially given his comment about Rihanna not minding his beatings or commands to suck his dick.

          Disturbing shit.

          • John Anderson says:

            “Take the commonplace nature of this term and forget it for a moment. What does it mean? It means that a man is telling a woman who doesn’t like him that she is supposed to perform a sexual act on him.

            That’s sexual assault. It’s intended to be scary, degrading and offensive. It doesn’t make her his opponent in a verbal fight, it makes her his victim.”

            Hos usually perform sex acts for money and are not sexually assaulted. You need to read the whole tweet.

          • Joanna, I’ve said this to a woman and a man before that I’ve HATED. I didn’t imply anything to do with rape or forced sex. I implied a big “fuck you” to them. It’s a term so often used loosely, just like “I’ll kill you” which may mean they wanna kill you, or it may mean they hate your guts. He may mean she’s supposed to suck it, or he may mean it as a fuck you. SMD isn’t an automatic rape statement. Do you think homophobic men who say “suck my dick, faggot” want the male they’re talking about actually suck their dick?

        • Well – having discussed the idea of guilt with many people, for “Suck My Dick” to be criminally abusive you would need to prove “Mens Rea” – that there was absolute intent, even pre meditated, to be abusive (as well as a valid legal statute in force to make it illegal)

          On a basic view – telling someone to suck an organ has no significance unless there is legitimate expectation that the person receiving the words will be upset-alarmed-distressed and the person saying it knows this to be the case! Just being a by stander is not a position to adjudicate from. You may be offended but unless it is aimed at you it can’t be abused by it.

          So many like to swap out offended for abused – it makes it appear they have a more central and powerful role and they attempt to claim authority which they would not have otherwise. Swapping out language and switching the directions and perceptions of that language is one of the oldest tricks in the book – and even children get it!

          Do you not like the taste of Tomatoes or do you hate Tomatoes? Kids get it that if they throw a tantrum and use the word hate they get more attention. Most grow out of the behaviour fully by age 8, but unfortunately some carry the language power focus over into adulthood, and can even become very skilful in using it to be manipulative.

          The language can be abusive when it is directed to you. When it’s not directed at you it can’t be abusive only offensive.

          After that Guilt and assumptions of Mens Rea are really just people deciding where their personal social boundaries are – and it gets terribly fractious in the court of public opinion because so few have legal training – have seen far too many fictitious portrayals of Attorneys playing in court rooms – and see juries as any group greater than zero who can be accosted with any bit of a supposed water right case that happens to leak out on them in passing! Some are so full of themselves, the leakage can be considerable!

          So does it need intent to be abusive? yes! If it’s just in passing it may be offensive! However, Statute trumps all – so it may be in passing and seen only as offensive, but you end up in the pokey! … of course it gets even more complex when you factor in the US 1st amendment thingy where free speech trumps all – and there isn’t even consistency of what is an is not offensive from state to state!

          I prefer to just be agnostic and ask people why they believe that they have been assaulted – or offended and by which means. If they can provide cogent and realistic responses it may be worth entering into dialogue – but those who can’t or more to the point won’t and who are evasive, manipulative, unerringly charming whilst covertly hostile and always leaving Portraits about that are ever so Dorian Grey – well them folks I do like to study closely and use then for research into Oddballs of the net.

          I also remember my basics of First Aide. When you get to the scene the one’s screaming and making lots of noise are generally fine. It’s the one’s who are quiet who are most likely the most affected and the one’s who need to be focused upon.

          I keep wondering about some research I saw a few months ago about the correlation of people closing social media accounts and self harm. Alarmingly high correlation and rather a large gender disparity too! It seems that when a Guy closes down social media accounts that have been long-standing people view it as irrelevant ( no matter the associated events ) and then fail to act promptly when self harm arises. Report or indicate self harm on social networks – as female it gains a positive response – as male it gains negative response and even people encouraging you to Jump!

          I have even seen twits using social networks to make comment such as they had it coming – especially if the person was seen in a negative light. It’s shocking how little it takes to change a person from a crusader to a troll – and of course after so many years many have caught onto the Concern Trolls being some of the most manipulative and the worst behaved.

          Wolves in Sheeps Clothing is one thing – but that rabid lamb with multiple hatchets, guns and daggers for sticking in backs dressed up as a poodle is really dangerous. I never turn me back on them! P^)

          • Joanna Schroeder says:

            Just anecdotally:

            I had a man try to barge into my place of work (long story) and I told him, “Get the fuck out!” and he said, “Fuck you. I’ll fuck your ass!” (not eloquent, but effective) and then when I called 911 he left.

            Now, technically he was trespassing, but he was a member of the paparazzi and I worked in a store full of celebrities, so him trespassing wasn’t exactly uncommon.

            But he got arrested for saying “I’ll fuck your ass” to me, spent a week in jail and I got a 3 year restraining order against him for me, and 6 months for all three of the stores I worked in, my home and UCLA where I was a student.

            As far as I know, being on my boss’ property wasn’t why I got the R.O. it was the comment.

            So Chris Brown should start thinking more about what he says, especially if he says those things in person. My harasser only came after me twice (once when he said that, once he stood outside my store) but he got a pretty stiff penalty. A week in men’s lockup in downtown LA is nothing to sniff at.

            • @Joanna – I get your views on The Political Nature of Language, and there is as striking correlation of how language which is seen as sexualised and about women has under feminist theory all become about committing rape and assault – victimising women.

              It’s a very natural progression from the Marxists and then Marxists-Feminist roots that were laid down in the 60/70′s. At the extreme, any verbal (and even none verbal) communication can be taken as Offensive if the person receiving it states it’s offensive. I’ve seen lectures of how any language which can be attributed to power and attributed to being patriarchal is sexist and dangerosue to anyone receiving the language as aimed at them. It’s a logical out come of the philosophy and actually gender neutral.

              Further up the thread you make reference to “Thing is, when guys say “Suck my dick” or “bend over and take it” or “I’ll fuck you in the ass” (which is what one guy said to me when I asked him to leave the store I was working in) to women, it is to SCARE them. It is to make them afraid of being raped.

              I have to ask – when I’m told by persons that they “Own Me” and that they “Have Me By The Short And Curlies” – “by the Coglioni” and they intend to “Rompere Mi Coglioni ” – they have me “By The Balls” – that I am their “Bitch” – at which point does it become reasonable for me to assume, believe or even suspect that I am in imminent danger of assault – sexual assault -Sexualaised assault – and it is the intent of the person using such phrases to intend to communicate such intent?

              Am I to be obliged to assume at all times that any use of certain phrases – idioms – modes of communication are to be seen as representing Sexual threat against myself and all other possible people present where any implied gender dynamic within the threat may be made real without further notice?

              As a gay man- which should I fear more? Having these phrases communicated to me by a man or a woman – and if a women has Suck My Dick said to her by another woman is it Abuse, and intent it commit sexual assault – to control through threat?

              Your story intimates that anyone saying anything in a certain set of language should be seen as threatening sexual assault – in whcih case it is gender neutral, isn’t it?

              I get it that you have buttons that can get pushed easily ( and you should consider that you have no Idea what my buttons may be or the events I have personally experienced … but they are more than comparable ) and you are aware that I am very fed up with people advocating that all women should be treated as having PTSD related to sexual assault becasue it makes all people victims and tells people with PTSD that other people are responsible for their welfare. And you will be aware that I hone in rapidly on people who are discussing PTSD or who may need focused communication.

              I get it that you have had personal experience of conduct that resulted in someone ending up inside – Join the Club. But your experience is yours and whilst I can inform your views it can not be used to justify you supposedly knowing all facts about an individual – their relatioship to other people – even specific people … so unless you are hinting that you have had close personal contact with a certain person and as such are talking not from reported media but from reality… well some sceptacism may be in order, and if that is not proving possible you may need to ask why and consider how more care with language could prove useful to many.

            • I didn’t really realize that saying that could get any form of jailtime. If he had said just “fuck you” would he get jailtime still or was that mainly over the trespassing + “ill fuck your ass”?

              I’ve heard the term “suck my cock” soooo much that I’m probably desensitized to it, and had quite a few times where it was said with harmful intent but generally I think most people say it as another form of “fuck you” vs implying anything sexual. Although when you start saying ho, etc it does seem to target it towards that poster in a sexual manner vs the “fuck-you” style.

              Now that I think about it, I’ve heard a loootttttttt of verbally abusive stuff that could be considered sexual violence, especially at school. I’ve even had a woman say “suck my C***” which shocked me twice, one because I’m not use to women saying that type of thing as they usually say F off, and two because 99% of the time I hear C*** has nothing to do with a vagina.

              My understanding was that this was all covered under verbal abuse though I do see now it can be covered under sexual harassment. I think I’ve heard it so often that I’ve stopped thinking of it as sexual but just another way to say F off.

          • Makes sense. I guess my friends n I aren’t guilty:P. Some of the shit we discuss is pretty extreme but if a stranger said it, it’d be annoying as hell and they’d probably cop n earful. I always thought of sexual violence as more physical, or coersive vs just saying suck my dick. Would kiss my ass be considered sexual violence too?

  14. He is like a time bomb ready to go off…

    He is just pathetic to watch….

    Too easy to mock him…. better to just ignore him….

    • @ Leia – sorry but your comment does leave an uneasy feeling! I’m sure that If a man spoke in that way about a women – no matter who – he would be getting at the least tinted and most likely painted with the Sexist Motif and Lots of it.

      I remember quite a few news stories about a Mrs Rebekah Mary Brooks (née Wade) who was married to a Mr Ross Kemp. The police got called to a domestic with him injured and her cautioned by police. She happens to also be an ex newspaper editor and CEO and she presently is facing criminal investigation connected with the events around media Phone Hacking – Police Bribery – the Closure of News of The World Newspaper … and so much more.

      Now if I was to describe her:

      “She’s a Time Bomb waiting to go off…
      She’s just pathetic to watch….
      Too easy to mock her…. better to just ignore her….”,

      .. I wonder, would it be seen as a judgement upon her as a woman or upon her conduct as a person?

      Oddly folks commenting upon Ms Brooks tend to be of the view that she is a Multiple faceted mega bitch, due to the number of “Singular Events” as well as Major Scandals she is linked to! But being emdia savvy, she always makes sure that anything in the public domain is whiter than white to the point where she makes Snow White look like the cheapest of call girls.

      But if the only significant event was her having to face the police after they were called to deal with the assault upon her husband…. well if you called her nasty names or made nasty intimations about her, would they be judged by her conduct, or the sex/gender of the person making them?

  15. F*ck Chris Brown, and F*ck Jenny Johnson , both of them are assholes and idiots. Period. And lol at this comedy writer starting the fight with tweets, like another idiots out there. If you want a fight, go meet that people and start a fight, don’t be a coward and starting a fight in social media.

    I don’t like CB but I don’t like Jenny aslo. Both of them are just cowards.

  16. If they’re both provoking each other? I think they’re both assholes. Send em both to the naughty room! And Chris reallllly doesn’t learn does he? I’m shocked he still gets support. If he were a tv presenter in Aus he’d be fired so quick for that shit. How the hell does he still have any support?

  17. I see that Mr Brown’s Twitter Account is open again – so I take it that the implication that it was closed by some other party and implying sanction can now be dropped?

  18. One could make the case that tweeting (or merely saying) “Fuck you!” is a threat of sexual violence. After all, it’s an imperative statement using a word (“fuck”) that everyone knows means to engage in sex with, and the tone suggests that the speaker intends to do so whether the listener consents or not. It’s such a sexually charged word that of course it must literally be interpreted as an expression of sexual intent. So, you could make that case…but it would be a ridiculous case, detached from what the idiom means in everyday language, to speakers and listeners alike.

    That’s the kind of argument I think is being made here about “suck my dick”. We’re not talking about it coming from the lips of an assailant in the act of telling a victim what to do. We’re talking about one obscene insult in response to another. It makes as much sense to me to accuse Brown of threatening sexual assault with his SMD tweet as it does to accuse Johnson of making a racist slur with her “piece of shit” line. In other words — none.

    If “suck my dick” is approaching felony assault now, does that mean “kiss my ass” is a misdemeanor?

    • Yeah I agree with you on this. I do think he escalated it when he didn’t have to, but I think what many people are responding to (myself included) is the implication that by calling him a piece of s*** made it acceptable for him to respond how he did. It’s kind of a parallel with “s/he asked for it” which is something that tees me off.

      Your other point about Twitter is interesting too….it seems fair to say that they engage in selective censorship, but because (like Google used to be) they have been a benevolent dictator everyone seems to ignore it.

    • If “suck my dick” is approaching felony assault now, does that mean “kiss my ass” is a misdemeanor?

      LOL – and does that mean “Stop Breaking My Balls” is code for “Please Dial 911.” ?

      But when it comes to “Kiss My Ass” The big issue is tongues – cos without it would only be assault, but with it becomes forcing a person to commit rape – to penetrate.

      Of course the use of language coupled with only recently changed definitions of rape do make idiomatic use of language interesting. … and as rape by envelopment is not recognised, any language used by a women to a man ( or even another woman ) which intimates such action would be excluded from any consideration of verboten language and idiom?

    • ^^^ This x 1 milllllionnnnn.

  19. xmaseveeve says:

    Oh my goodness, this discussion has snowballed? Fuck off is not the same as a statement of sexual intent, eg. ‘I”l fuck you in the ass’. The latter is a threat, and, although context can be an aggravating factor, mens rea is irrelevant. So, don’t use the word ‘I’!

    Yes, the law refers to that which a reasonable person would find threatening, but, although the test is pretty objective, remember the thin skull rule may apply. (In other words, you must assume that everybody would feel threatened.) In the absence of a possible perceived threat, people have the right to be offended, but freedom of speech is precious. I don’t believe in Blasphemy.

    Chris Brown didn’t say, ‘I’ll stick my cock in your mouth’. If he had, his feet wouldn’t have touched the ground. I still think he’s a dangerous individual to women, and a few more of these mistakes could easily violate his parole. I hope that girl gets the Hell out of there.

    • I take that as US based you are also looking at Intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) which to my understanding is more and more being given the same weight in tort as battery.

      In other countries different legal rules apply! P^) … including Mens Rea.

      Eggshell – Thin Skull Rule gets more interesting, because as time passes there is an onward erosion as to what language means and how it is used – so “Suck On It” as a general scornful aside could and I’m sure will be made to be taken as a direct threat in one case – some day soon – it will be pushed through as IIED – and thereafter it won’t matter about context and nuance – the event will be used to force a change in language usage through the use of shaming tactics. It’s been seen before and it will be seen again … and the pattern and language shift is not just related to gender.

      I do find it interesting that from a US centric perspective every-time a single event occurs there is a visible and concerted attempt to make it prominent by Social Media and popularise it – use it to drive National Media – and at times evasion of reality and misrepresentation of the truth is coming out all over. It’s like an evolutionary driver in an environment – it just needs the confluence of the right conditions to flip the environment and all in it into a new state … and then survival of the fittest for the new environment takes over.

      I’ve seen the pattern and shift before – odd to see court records for a victim of sexual assault stating that the person is a Practising Homosexual (language adopted into UK law circa 1900) and adopted from psychiatry – thereby implying that gay men were mentally ill – gets challenged on Human Rights Article 14 – Prohibition Of Discrimination – you should have seen the legal clerks and government clerks run!

      Same happened with that N Word – many think it was obliged to shift and go under ground by campaigning and Public Opinion. Nope legal shift caused by cases brought under the Race Relations Act. It was interesting how when new guidance was suddenly required – memos flew language got banned and the primary driver was fear by employers of litigation.

  20. xmaseveeve says:

    Just thought I’d add; because of the conviction for a brutal assault, the second comment carried the implication, not that Rhianna liked sucking it, but that she’d been beaten into submission, and so would that woman be if she messed with him. So, this dude really was skating on thin ice. He needs to get a grip on his rage.

  21. “Just ask Rihanna if she mad”

    Don’t need to ask her, just look at the picture of her beaten up face you caused. What a dumb schmuck

  22. Chris Brown’s Twitter Deactivated After Tweet War with Comedy Writer

    1st – The implication that the twitter account was Turned Off is misleading – the account is back an active – it appears the CB tuned out rather than carry on with matters.

    2nd – If this is war then going to Walmart is Armageddon and it just shows how language needs to be used carefully to not mislead and provoke people to think and even behave in different ways.

    3rd – If people wish to say that CB should not have reacted to what was written, they may need to step back – look at the headline here and consider how it is making them react emotionally and look at this whole none event!

    Why do I get the impression that this none story is being used to agendarise – again!

    • Mr Supertypo says:

      You have a point Media :-)

      • @ Mr Supertypo – Actually as I keep looking at the background and how this has been playing out over the years, It actually gets worse.

        Again to keep some people’s reactive natures under control, I have to make clear that I knew Sweet FA about this pair – Brown and Johnson – until this thread came up. Given the reaction and my interests in looking at and tracing media tropes this is an obvious and no brainer hot potato.

        What comes out of the murk is the issue of Bullying – in particular how bullies defend themselves and their conduct. There are three stages and sets of tactics there.

        1) Trivialise and make light
        2) Seek reaction and support – that can be provoking the target to get a reaction, or targeting others to get reaction about the target – or both. The focus is actually not the target it’s getting people looking at anything but The Bully
        3) Bully retreats – could be feigned Victimhood – supposed illness – even change of career.

        When you look at the dynamics guess who is displaying the strategies in a very UN-Comedic way? Jenny Johnson. She’s a classic stage 2. I suspect she has found a fertile ground for her personal traits within the field of comedy.

        The patterns of conduct shown by Jenny Johnson, the The Provoke – Retreat – Reinvent – Provoke cycle
        and patterns over time are too defined to not raise concerns about how similar the patterns are to Cyber-Stalking – Cyber-Harrasment, and when you factor in how defence plays from other areas of abuse psychology just keep on coming up, I’m sorry but I see nothing comical at all!

        The style of comedy supposedly offered is interesting and it does require highly articulated and even obscene ideas/images to keep notoriety high and twit friends – social networking flows high. To keep focus upon her she is willing to do and say quite outrageous things – or things that will provoke outrage.

        The reference to the tweet “The maker of the child’s fedora should have to give Kirk Douglas a blowjob until he ejaculates, no matter how long it takes.” evidently has some context, yet I’m having a few issues with unravelling all of the text – subtexts – ideas all being brought into one place. There is an unpleasant indication of child abuse and abuse of child abusers – lynching – that gets played out. It’s just one example of the Provoke Response and be Provocative patterns – … and when you look at what she does it just keeps on coming out.

        Ms Johnson seems to like the role of Comedy Sheriff, and the idea of Blazzing Saddles, and yet she is fully aware of modern day communication and it’s effects.

        For me the comedy routines are simply a cover – and she has managed to manoeuvre herself into an interesting position of being the comedy gate keeper for violent reaction in gender issues polarised around women.

        Saying things that others find popular or populist does not inoculate against a person being socially devious, manipulative or dangerous. Image can be very misleading – think Sandusky and remove gender, sex, sexuality and consider only how power gets used. It’s disturbing to see so many identify with Johnson and when she wants notoriety they are so willing to sacrifice others and their own minds to her interests.

    • Joanna Schroeder says:

      MediaHound – When the article was written, the account WAS off.

      Second, this may not be a story to YOU, but it’s a story to a lot of people. Let’s remember here that a very, very famous man beat his girlfriend up so badly he was arrested and found guilty.

      Now, he’s still super famous, despite getting in more fights and using threatening language.

      You all want to be so excited about a Twitter comedian “harassing” him and really want to believe that she somehow deserved what she got from him…. Sure, I agree, she ABSOLUTELY should have expected this. I mean, an abusive woman-hating asshole is probably going to respond to your attacks with abusive, woman-hating responses.

      But that doesn’t make the story irrelevant. Every celebrity gets harassing tweets. All the time. Even ones everyone loves like Ashton Kutcher gets “you’re a fucking asshole, you should die” tweets, because there are people like that comedian who troll and make fun of people as part of their job.

      That’s not the story. Because that’s an OLD STORY.

      The story here is that this guy is so off-the-handle that he actually responded by telling her he was going to SHIT IN HER EYE and told her to suck his dick.

      That is unusual. Because it goes against the advice every lawyer, studio handler, manager and agent will be telling him. Getting a tattoo of something that may not be Rihanna’s beaten-up face, but looks a fuck of a lot like it, that was ill-advised for someone that actually BEAT HER UP.

      It’s sort of like Charlie Sheen. Famously arrested for domestic abuse, accused of domestic abuse by his ex wife Denise, starts acting off the fucking plantation by videotaping himself speaking nonsense and high as a kite. That was news. Not because it was such an unusual thing to do in the real world, but because to go that far off the plot of what Hollywood normally “allows” shows a sign of someone who’s in real danger. And everyone who loved Charlie then was saying, “Dude, just don’t die. I’m afraid you’re going to die.”

      The question isn’t, “Did Johnson deserve a verbal attack because she was provoking him?” The question is, “When will Chris Brown stop?”

      And if you all want to turn CB into a victim, go ahead, but to the rest of the world the truth is clear. He’s off the rails and he’s dangerous and will stop at nothing in his relentless pursuit of burying himself and ruining his own career.

      Let’s just hope Rihanna or another young woman who happens to get in his way on the path to self-destruction doesn’t end up dead.

      • Uh, hello, he’s a victim of verbal abuse and harassment. Hate him all you want but if you punch him, he’s still a victim AND an abuser. In fact a lot of abusers are probably victims at one point, they aren’t destined to one role. Do you think he is not a victim of harassment or abuse?

        Is anyone doubting that he’s a risk to women he is dating? I think he’s a trainwreck personally but still they both acted like dipshits, yet tbh I think in this twitter case alone she did worse with the 3 years of harassment if that’s true.

      • To the rest of the world it is clear?

        Such an interesting claim. I think you have over stepped again – and if you are right I am flattered by the compliment! It’s not everyday that I’m told I’m so singularly unique as a man. Of course I do regard some ofthe rfolks as my mentors – Ghandi – M L King and even mandela!

        • Joanna Schroeder says:

          You’re right, of course that’s not a factual statement. It’s an exaggeration. I’m exaggerating for effect.

          But I stand by everything else I said.

          • @Joanna Schroeder

            You’re right, of course that’s not a factual statement. It’s an exaggeration. I’m exaggerating for effect.

            Thank you for clarifying that you do that. It so hard to respond in rational ways to undisclosed exaggeration. It’s also seen as rather difficult to find a tactful way to raise the issue without others being needlessly defensive – and even claiming it has not happened.

            So thank you – I’m sure it will assist many in progressing in discussion. P^)

      • @ Joanne – Oh You Do make me laugh! It’s often hilarious seeing what you will write next.

        To the rest of the world it is clear?

        Such an interesting claim. I think you have over stepped again – and if you are right, I am flattered by the compliment!

        It’s not everyday that I’m told I’m so singularly unique as a man and separated in totality from all other member of the clan mankind. Of course I do regard some other folks as my mentors – Ghandi – M L King and even Mandela! They did stand alone and many thought them out on a limb!

        I have always wondered why the three most noted males for social change and peace in the 20th century are all none Caucasian? It has to be more than just dumb luck and statistics at play.

        Oh by the way – “And if you all want to turn CB into a victim, go ahead,..” – you know that is a completely false presentation of me, my views and my ideals – so I have to wonder why would you even attempt to put it out there? It is such a poor and junior high debating tactic that it really does place you in a bad light.

        I advocate people taking responsibility of their own views, how they look at the world and above all else for how they present themselves to others. Why do you keep on presenting other people in a way that makes such a lovely multicoloured patchwork frock for you to wear and even hide behind?

        … thanks again to your unique compliment – but standing alone and being a Good Man is so often misunderstood by those who just can’t see what’s in front of them! P^)

        … and thank you for debating me and not the subject. If I was a narcissist I may think it flattering – But as My interests are in people – tropes – psychology and the net I’ll just use it as another example of odd behaviour and focus shifting in the hope that others won’t notice! P^)

        17.53 UTC

    • @MediaHound: I can’t believe you haven’t sniffed the goings on the, ‘Why Black Women are ALSO Afraid of Black Men” thread. The relationship between ideas and words is so cloaked in such disturbingly harsh and creepy tones it’s a wonder my computer doesn’t melt when I put this stuff on the screen.Nonetheless, there is much to explore and analyze.

  23. xmaseveeve says:
    • Don’t see what is so shocking about Huffington correcting earlier errors and misleading statements when they say The Twitter feud resulted in Brown deactivating his Twitter account for a matter of hours, ...

      Or is the OH MY GOD meant to imply that “HE” has now done something else?

      Do you know the number of times per day that death threats in various forms are made across twitter and the net in general by people you have never heard of and would not ever hear of except by accident… or is that irrelevant when the evolutionary drivers and net memes are out and hungry?

      A witch-hunt – An investigation carried out ostensibly to uncover subversive activities but actually used to harass and undermine those with differing views, often involving moral panic, mass hysteria and lynching, – and I chose the L word because it has just the right flavour and seasoning to go with OH MY GOD!

  24. She sure is a funny person….

    http://www.papermag.com/arts_and_style/2012/05/jenny-johnson-jennyjohnsonhi5-funniest-twitter.php

    What would happen if you met Chris Brown?

    Oh god, I’d probably run for the hills. He replied to a tweet once. I was proud that after six months of harassing the guy, all my hard work paid off

    • So Ellisa – that’s from May. 2, 2012 – and she’s saying she likes to provoke – harass – showing an awareness of reaction if she does say the right thing – as in provokes/harasses the right way?

      Is her language seen as funny because she is female – or comedian – or female comedian? Then you have the second question which is “Is Her Language Funny?”.

      I knew nothing of the Chris Brown Character until this last 24 hours and this thread starting – but in looking at the whole story and the history and the language being used about him …. I smell a big gendered racist rat!

      He’s no saint – but deliberately badgering and abusing to provoke reaction and profit from it – Where I come from that’s called Paparazzi. This is one of the first blatant cases I have seen of Snap Shot by Twitter being used to abuse!

    • John Anderson says:

      “Oh god, I’d probably run for the hills. He replied to a tweet once. I was proud that after six months of harassing the guy, all my hard work paid off.”

      Isn’t harassment a crime in some states? Didn’t she just admit to committing a crime? When are the people who wanted to charge Chris Brown with a crime going to demand prosecution of Jenny Johnson? I suspect never and some people don’t see white privilege.

  25. Ok – curiosity killed my cat Mr Hound, so I went looking for some of her funny Jenny tweets:

    The maker of the child’s fedora should have to give Kirk Douglas a blowjob until he ejaculates, no matter how long it takes.

    I’ll take “Things Dumb Whores Say” for $600 RT @KimKardashian: Why can’t people do things right the 1st time! Always gotta do stuff myself!

    Dear whores turned soccer moms,I’m not praying for your kid who has the sniffles and wet farts, so stop making that your Facebook status.

    If you’re feeling bad about yourself, keep in mind that Brad Pitt is engaged to Billy Bob Thornton’s sloppy seconds.

    If a guy’s coffee order has more than 5 words in it, he should have to tuck his penis and balls behind his butt for the rest of the day.

  26. She really has a jocular thing for oral sex….maybe Chris Brown was just relating to her on a level she feels comfortable?? A bit more of the same from Jenny:

    - Never Forget: Ted Danson used to go down on Whoopi Goldberg
    - I bet Kenny G gives blowjobs out of the side of his mouth.
    - I’d give Chaz Bono a blowjob before I watched one second of American Idol.

  27. This Jenny Johnson is horrible comedian, because shes not funny at all..

    Try picking a fights in twitter, lol, cowards, idiots, asshole

  28. Mr Supertypo says:

    Maybe I am a bit naive, but I dont understand why Jenny Johnson troll CB? why does she got out and insult him? no the references to his past are invalid. She attack him unprovoched, I like to know why?
    Not defending CB or his choice of words (as I can see they are more a product of the enviroment than a statement of intent, may be wrong although) but if somebody insult me, my first reaction is to insult back.
    So I as I see it, she attack him, hoping for a reaction and now she can play victim or something? Or am I wrong?


    • So I as I see it, she attack him, hoping for a reaction and now she can play victim or something? Or am I wrong?

      I think in the case of Jenny Johnson herself its a matter attacking him in hopes of getting some publicty (and possibly some sympathy) and being absolved of her own responsibility via Brown’s past actions (“It’s okay to insult him because he truly is a bad person.”).

      I think that the folks here are trying to bypass all of that in hopes of using this as a jump off point for some bigger discussion about why it seems to be okay to threaten women with sexual assault as a means to shut them up (even though that question doesn’t seem to be in the post itself, which appears to be about Brown and not the issues of his actions and words). And I think that some of the other folks here have a problem with trying to use an instance where Brown’s responses are intentionally and actively provoked (vs the countless times such responses from Brown and others were totally unprovoked) as a jump off point for those responses.

      It comes off looking these questions are nothing but a smoke screen to justify Johnson’s actions and protect her from being called out on them.

    • There are interesting and well documents gender differences in dealing with abuse – trolling – harassment – cyber stalking.

      From a well known research publication “Whilst females were concerned about injury, males were significantly more concerned about damage to reputation and financial loss.”

      I have been aware of these differences for some years, and I find it odd that there is so much pressure for such gendered differences to “NOT” be widely known and even talked about.

      Make an accusation against a woman via the net and she will perceive physical threat and harm F=28.0% M=14% . A male treated the same way perceives threat to reputation F=28.4% M=46.3%

      He calls her name she fears Physical Violence – valid personal feeling but not valid assessment of risk.

      She calls him names he perceives threat to reputation – and when done via the net is valid assessment of risk.

      Police are being advised to take greater notice of men reporting cyber harassment and stalking as risk is higher and perceived to be higher.

  29. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2239142/Elisabeth-Hasselbeck-condemns-Chris-Brown-deletes-Twitter-account-following-attack-comedy-writer.html

    Verbal rape? Yeah. what said was terrible but I think it’s a bit too soon to initiate the “Anything bad that is done to a woman is some form of rape” rule.

  30. I’m not coming back because I am so upset by newshound? mediahound? suggesting that I want to lynch a black man. His race is irrelevant. I love the website though. Goodbye.

Trackbacks

  1. [...] There’s an interesting conversation going on over at Good Men Project, it revolves around some pretty nasty language Chris Brown used on Twitter. [...]

  2. [...] his Twitter account following a vulgar tussle with the great Twitter comedienne Jenny Johnson (Good Men Project)Some examples of bad movies with great opening credit sequences (AV Club)Two down, five to go: Izzy [...]

  3. [...] This is a comment by Grey Aiken on the post “Chris Brown’s Twitter Deactivated After Tweet War with Comedy Writer“. [...]

Speak Your Mind