Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Progressive Christian
No one is innocently ‘fooled’ by blackface trolls

No one is innocently ‘fooled’ by blackface trolls

Last updated on: April 24, 2019 at 5:27 pm by Fred Clark

No one is innocently ‘fooled’ by blackface trolls 2019-04-24T17:27:20-04:00 Fred Clark

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

In the early 2000s at the paper, we had a prolific and obnoxious troll whose goal in life seemed to be to fill every discussion topic on the paper’s website (DelawareOnline) with profane, angry, eliminationist racist rants. It was serious Neo-Nazi, Hutu-radio level hate with constant calls for state-sponsored and vigilante violence against black people, women, black women, immigrants, LGBT people, and anyone else who wasn’t this sick dude’s idea of the right kind of people. And it was constant.

The guy posted hundreds of times a day from a dial-up account that stymied the paper’s IP-blocking measures, but other readers and posters took to flaming him and mocking him for having lost his job at DelDOT. That’s when he stumbled onto what he thought was a brilliant trick. He changed his username to “Missy” and started claiming that he himself was a black woman. Therefore, in his dim little brain, he was allowed to say whatever vile things he wanted about his “fellow” black women. And also, he imagined, anyone who objected to his rants would have to be silenced because they were being racist and sexist against his white male self.

“Missy’s” ploy was, to say the least, unconvincing. His sneering attempts to “sound” black and female just revealed him ever more clearly as a pasty, racist misogynist who was unwilling and unable to imagine, even slightly, being anything or anyone else. No one — absolutely no one — other than himself was ever fooled by his “clever” trick.

No one ever is.

I thought of “Missy” when reading this remarkable story by Rachelle Hampton for Slate: “The Black Feminists Who Saw the Alt-Right Threat Coming.”

More than anything, Shafiqah Hudson said, the clearest red flag was the accounts’ inability to hide their contempt for the very people they were attempting to imitate. They tweeted about collecting welfare checks and smoking weed, with an occasional screed against white people. And most of these accounts spoke a version of African American Vernacular English that no real black person had ever used. “#EndFathersDay,” said one, “until men start seeing they children as more then just ‘fuck trophies.’ ” To casual observers online, #EndFathersDay appeared to be the work of militant feminists, most of whom were seemingly women of color. To Hudson, the ruse was never anything but transparent. “No one who knew or liked a black feminist,” she told me, “was fooled.” But the hashtag was already trending worldwide.

The minstrelsy of these troll accounts was about as convincing as the transparently bogus claims of “Missy.” It was a contemptuous costume intended only to mock, not to deceive.

The lie here is that such a false pretense amounted to a “lie” at all in the usual sense of that word. The goal of such falsehood is not to misinform or to deceive, but to invite others who may be so inclined to participate in self-deception. “We are pretending that people we don’t like are like this,” that invitation says. “Here is your chance to volunteer to join us in pretending that you ‘believe’ that too.”

Undeniably, the people creating and fabricating these hoaxes know them to be false. They are aware, firsthand, of their own choices and actions in inventing such falsehoods. But what of those who agree to endorse and to spread this disinformation? They lack the absolute certainty of its falsehood that the creators surely possess, so isn’t it possible that they have merely been deceived — that they might be good-faith dupes rather than bad-faith actors who have willingly and knowingly accepted the invitation to participate in deception?

No. That’s just not an option. The sham is too obvious and too self-evidently false. Even if we grant these would-be dupes the dubious charity of presuming that they are too staggeringly ignorant to see this, we cannot exempt them from all responsibility for examining — even slightly — whether or not the witness they are choosing to bear against their neighbors is true or false.

“Really?” is such a widespread reaction to shocking news that it has become a lazy comedian’s stand-alone punchline. Instead of bothering to write an actual joke, they’ll mention some trending topic and then just sarcastically and dismissively say, “Really?” It’s not “really” a question when they do this — just a shorthand for disagreement with some idea they presuppose is, indeed, real. Even when it often is not.

That’s annoying not just because it’s bad craft and bad comedy, but because “really?” is a necessary question for comedians and for anyone else interested in the truth — in dealing with reality as opposed to fantasy. The failure, or refusal, to ask that question is what makes the supposed “dupes” complicit in the deception they have chosen to take part in.

They’re not asking that question because they already know — or at the very least strongly suspect — that the answer is quite obviously, “No, not really.”

And that answer would disappoint them. It would take all the fun out of the little bad-faith game they’ve enlisted to play. They do not ask that question because they do not want to hear the answer — do not want to see reality distinguished from fantasy, because they prefer the fantasy. They enjoy that fantasy because they’ve trained themselves to enjoy “contempt for the very people they were attempting to imitate.”

Hudson is correct that “no one who knew or liked a black feminist” was fooled by the foolish frauds incompetently posing as such online. But no one else was fooled by them either.

Some, however, chose to pretend to be fooled — chose to participate in the foolery. These were not merely people who did not know or like any black feminists, but people who emphatically did not want to ever know or to like them:

… The mockery #EndFathersDay made of an increasingly influential online feminist movement became predictable catnip to conservatives. Tucker Carlson devoted a segment to it. Ashe Schow in the Washington Examiner called it the latest “drivel” “from the feminist outrage machine.” Dan McLaughlin tweeted that the hashtag was “a neat illustration of the cultural trajectory of progressivism.” “#EndFathersDay Because it’s really just Second Caregiver of Unspecified Gender Identity Day, you cisnormative a**holes,” mocked Ben Shapiro. What these commentators were missing was that the #EndFathersDay campaign was a hoax, started by anonymous trolls on 4chan to engender exactly the vitriol that pundits so readily stepped up to spew.

Carlson and Shapiro claim to be telling us what they “believe,” but their claim to “really” believe it is not credible. They are not telling us what they believe to be true, but what they wish to be true. And thus by revealing their own eagerness to bear false witness against their neighbors, they bear true witness against themselves.

Rachelle Hampton has offered these bearers of false witness an opportunity for redemption. Her article affords them the grace of a second chance — a chance to retake the test they failed the first time around. More than that, it requires them to retake that test, thereby providing not just an opportunity for redemption but also the opportunity to double-down on their earlier failure.

And what is the test? Here, again, is C.S. Lewis cutting through our pretense and reminding us that toxic bad faith is knowable, measurable, and confirmable. It is also, he warns, terminal:

The real test is this. Suppose one reads a story of filthy atrocities in the paper. Then suppose that something turns up suggesting that the story might not be quite true, or not quite so bad as it was made out. Is one’s first feeling, “Thank God, even they aren’t quite so bad as that,” or is it a feeling of disappointment, and even a determination to cling to the first story for the sheer pleasure of thinking your enemies are as bad as possible? If it is the second then it is, I am afraid, the first step in a process which, if followed to the end, will make us into devils.

class warfare

racism

Satanic baby-killers

Previous Post

April 24, 2019

Standin' on the corner, I didn't mean no harm

Next Post

April 25, 2019 Primary concerns

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category class warfare evangelicals Iraq Left Behind Mammon music Uncategorized

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 August 2025 July 2025 June 2025 May 2025 April 2025 March 2025 February 2025 January 2025 December 2024 November 2024 October 2024 September 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 May 2024 April 2024 March 2024 February 2024 January 2024 December 2023 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 April 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 November 2022 October 2022 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 June 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 December 2021 November 2021 October 2021 September 2021 August 2021 July 2021 June 2021 May 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 February 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 July 2019 June 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 September 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 August 2007 July 2007 June 2007 May 2007 April 2007 March 2007 February 2007 January 2007 December 2006 November 2006 October 2006 September 2006 August 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2006 March 2006 February 2006 January 2006 December 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2005 December 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February 2004 January 2004 December 2003 November 2003 October 2003 September 2003

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Jesus raised whose daughter from the dead?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Jairus Darius Thaddeus Bartholomew