Why doncha go die?

Hey, Emma A. Jane. You’ve received this sort of material personally. This means you’re biased and your research can’t be trusted.

The origins of my research are indeed autoeth­nographic. The fact that I research and speak publicly about my scholarly work into gendered cyberhate also means I am targeted for ongoing abuse. Here is an extract from my book which speaks to some of these issues:

My study of misogyny online is undoubtedly driven by pre-existing curiosity arising from my own experience… Without… personal experience, I would not have assembled such a large archive, obtained so many valuable prototypical examples, or spent nearly two decades looking out for, collecting, and thinking about such material. Yet does this personal connection mean my work is inevitably tainted by selection and confirmation bias? After much agitation about this question, my considered answer is, ‘it depends’. Accusations of bias raise a plethora of interesting issues, including some perennial questions concerning the relationship between certain kinds of distance and knowledge… For me, however, the issue at stake is not whether a scholar’s experience of an object of analysis endangers their objectivity (because my view is that this is epistemically unavoidable); it is whether a researcher owns up to their inevitable lack of objectivity and offers as much information as possible about how their subjectivism might manifest. Indeed, critics who accuse others of a lack of objectivity may well be failing to acknowledge their own standpoints. (Jane, 2017: 11-13)

As with my book, I have endeavoured to make this site as transparent as possible in terms of clearly showing how the data has been sourced, coded, and analysed, so users can make up their own minds about the validity of its claims and contents.

Hey, Emma A. Jane. You cite your own work a lot. Clearly you’re caught up in yet another self-indulgent, self-serving academic echo chamber.

It is true I cite my own work. The gendered cyberhate problem is a relatively new problem and, at least up until recently, there has not been a whole lot of other relevant literature to cite. There has also been, arguably, a scholarly tendency to underplay, overlook, ignore, or otherwise marginalise various types of hostility online (for a detailed discussion of this, see: Jane, 2015 [and yes, I do realise I am citing myself again right now]). Fortunately, there has recently been an upsurge in academic research in this area and the number and range of relevant reference literature is increasing rapidly. See the Further Reading and Resources page for more details.

Hey, Emma A. Jane. Everything on this site is a bunch of lies, all of which have been fabricated by a pack of fabricating fabricators, you big, fat, fibbing fibber.

Yep. Like women who speak out about sexual violence offline, women who talk about being abused, harassed, threatened, and attacked online are routinely called liars, fabricators, fibbers, false flaggers, and on and on ad infinitum. Often this is a kneejerk response from individuals who have a vested interest in discrediting these women and/or who have developed a special immunity to evidence-based counterarguments. As such, there is no point engaging with this particular reaction at any length. All I will say on the matter is to reiterate that the bulk of the material in these generators was cut-and-pasted word-for-word from primary texts: that is, from screen shots of gendered cyberhate from Twitter, Facebook, web fora, under-the-line comment sections, and so on. For more information, see the Methodology, Input Data, and Data Sources sections of this website.

Hey, Emma A. Jane. You’re just an attention whore trying to drum up publicity for your new book.

Oh, yes, BUSTED. I do want people to read my book. It is the result of many years of research into a social problem about which I feel really strongly. If attempting to raise awareness about a critical feminist issue is a form of attention whoring, then I’ll own it. In fact, I’m heading out right now to buy a T-shirt that reads, ‘This Is What An Attention Whore Looks Like’.

Hey, Emma A. Jane. All these generators epically fail because they don't generate dick pics.

A thousand apologies. Here at Random Rape Threat Generators Inc. we appreciate how important it is for you to be able to send uninvited penis photography with your rape threats. We are working on addressing this unfortunate deficiency for the 2.0 versions.

Hey, Emma A. Jane. You’re a fat, ugly, slut, and pissy baby with crazy eyes who doesn’t know fuck about shit because there’s no misogyny on the internet.

Why, hello there Hatey McHater #98239987. Nice to hear from you for the rapeillionth time. Sometimes I wonder whether you ever think about the self-performative contradiction involved in using the internet to threaten to rape women who are pointing out that rape threats are happening on the internet. Then I go make myself another cup of tea and stop thinking about you altogether.