The stalker known as Creepalicious/Roguey, Juliet E. McKenna, and narratives

Yesterday, Juliet E. McKenna — whom I’ve never interacted with, don’t know, have never mentioned in any way (but who appears to have decided I’m her mortal enemy) — posted this.

A few things to unpack here: first, ‘astute observers of things she’s let slip’ is a piece of language that reminds me of a certain ‘movement’ and how they refer to their ‘diggers’ (i.e. those who ‘dig’ for and expose personal information on their targets). Next, she identifies my stalker as someone who’s been on the ‘receiving end’ of whatever monstrous evil McKenna believes I’ve perpetrated. She believes the stalker is my victim. (For more on this, see DARVO.)

But even if you believe incredible violation of privacy is acceptable, McKenna couldn’t be any further from the truth in her narrative of painting a remorseless stalker as the victim.

My stalker goes by ‘Creepalicious’ on twitter and on the RPGCodex forums as ‘Roguey’. They began to declare themselves my stalker in 2011 (even though we’d had no significant prior interaction — Roguey latched onto me at random); I left those forums. Roguey then showed up on twitter as ‘Creepalicious’ to harass me, wish me ‘happy birthday’ and link to a thread where they bragged about finding my personal information, and continued to send me private messages. One of them said ‘I still like you’, another ‘Josh Sawyer, a fauxgressive male?’ inviting me to go after him with them. Roguey/Creepalicious has characterized their twitter harassment, their years-long stalking, as ‘sibling teasing.’

After Mixon outed me last November, Creepalicious/Roguey has put on a veneer of a social justice crusader in public, joining Laura J. Mixon et al in their crusade to ‘hold Benjanun accountable’ — though the end goal is perhaps closer to ‘driving her offline and preferably get her, her family, and her extended family killed’. It’s a stroke of sheer luck for Roguey/Creepalicious, as this is an end goal that aligns perfectly with theirs.

In their previous contact — and indeed in direct email contact with me — Roguey/Creepalicious is more direct, perhaps unable to hold onto self-control long enough to keep up that pretext.

Here’s what Roguey was saying back in 2012.

She’s interesting and awesome. […] I want to know all about the life adventures of a smart spoiled rich girl who […] grew up haughty and mean, was apparently so bored and lonely she became a massive westaboo…

A decade ago, there was a guy to whom I formed a similar attachment. Becoming a disturbed monomaniac biographer is seemingly how I show online-affection. Probs cause this is my outlet for mania since unpleasant things have happened the few times it uncontrollably bled out into my actual life.

Roguey admits to being a serial-stalker, to being ‘manic’ and disturbed. There’s no pretense here of victimhood, of being some ‘social justice’ crusader out to hold the ‘abuser’ accountable. This is because, in 2012, Laura J. Mixon wasn’t yet around to do her thing; there wasn’t yet a massive public execution to ostracize and make me disappear under the name of ‘anti-harassment.’

On twitter, Roguey/Creepalicious (they’re the same person, though recently I understand they’ve been trying to deny the link) admitted to James Worrad that they’re my stalker. Again, there’s no pretense. Creepalicious enjoys identifying as my stalker. It appears to be the entirety of their online identity.

Before doxing me in a post that exposes my private information, Creepalicious sent me this email. Again — there’s no pretense; Creepalicious doesn’t have the self-control for that. There’s the recurring gleeful proclamation of being ‘manic’, of having a ‘manic rush’ off violating my privacy.

And then, in public, they admitted to blackmail: ‘I told her I’d violate the shit out of her privacy if she didn’t do what I said’. (Except this doesn’t even make sense, because what they say here doesn’t have anything to do with what they emailed me. The email boils down to ‘talk nice to me, baby, or I’ll dox you to death.’ There’s again that contrast between what they say in public — the pretense — and their naked abusiveness in emails to me; their inability to control their words.)

This isn’t a victim. This isn’t even what Laura J. Mixon pretends to be. This is a self-admitted ‘manic, disturbed’ stalker. I’m not the one using those terms — the stalker is. This is a textbook stalker. This person is horrifying and you should find them horrifying even if you aren’t the target, because take a second and look at these emails, these tweets, their twitter timeline. Nothing there is healthy or okay. Nothing there sounds like a person; there’s no humanity on display, just a raging need to experience power rush. Their twitter account is used exclusively to harass and stalk me, nothing else. On RPGCodex, Roguey starts thread after thread after thread dedicated to me, their obsession with me, to the point that even to some users there it’s obviously creepy.

This is someone who needs to be dragged away from the keyboard, given restraining orders, monitored by police. The rhetoric of Creepalicious/Roguey is that of a serial violator, a serial predator; the confession to ‘manic rush’ has that feeling of someone breathing heavily, masturbating under the keyboard as they sent this email. It’s almost a pop-culture stereotype of a serial killer, except this is for real. There’s pretty much nothing this creep has done that doesn’t reek of abuser logic. This is a human-shaped creature who has no grasp of consent, of boundaries, of the personhood of others. I’m genuinely afraid for anyone who has physical contact with them, because what will they do next? Their tendencies give every signal of escalating. Sooner or later they’ll do more than just stalk, harass, and dox online.

Sooner or later, I think this creature will seek that ‘manic rush’ through in-person violation.

And if you support this stalker, if you validate or give them platform (as Teresa Nielsen Hayden does here), if you endorse them, then I’m sorry, but you’re complicit. You are endorsing naked abuse. You’re endorsing someone who calls themselves a ‘manic, disturbed’ stalker. You’re saying you are okay with this. You’re saying you greenlight violation (and should it ever happen to you, your endorsement will come back to haunt you, certainly). You’re, on purpose, putting my life in danger and supporting the untold collateral destruction that could result. You want to put my family in danger. You want to put literal children in danger because you have a grudge with me you won’t let go of, often for no better reason than ‘my friends told me to hate this bitch.’

You don’t get to call my friends ‘pro-abuse.’ You’re pro-stalker.

Juliet E. McKenna is issuing victim-blaming; she is issuing stalker apologia. She’s defending someone who admits they get a manic rush from perpetrating unspeakable violation.

What does that sound like? I leave you to draw your own conclusions.