Absolutely Scarlett

As I Turn To Go (on Psychopathy and Thomas Churchwell)

2009-07-23T07:50:00.729-04:00

(Royalty Free photo from Gone With The Wind)

A few weeks ago, I was tidying my desk drawer and came across a printout of Thomas Churchwell's Diagnostic Assessment, dated July 16, 2008, written by his psychiatrist, Dr. Alkesh Patel, ACT Team Psychiatrist for Services For The Underserved. Posted by Churchwell himself on his own blog, it was a stunner. I had forgotten some of the content, including this quote:

"This 44 y/o Caucasian male has a long history of psychosis as well as a history of chemical dependency. The patient has a history of multiple hospitalizations."

That paragraph clarifies his victimization of me (and others) for three years.

In college my major was psychology, though I am a photographer by profession. Since I do have a background in psychology, however, I think it is safe to assume that Churchwell's recent rant, in which he wrote again that I "stole pictures off the Internet", am stalking him, work at Walmart, am jealous of the bully Susan, and many other loony lies—forecasts another lock-up for him. Cross your fingers.

Life being the way it is, a couple of weeks after I'd drafted this page, but long before I had finished it, I received the following joke in an email from someone who knows the blog situation well: "What do Tarquin Churchwell and a sperm have in common? Answer: Both have about a one in 3 million chance of becoming a human being."

Let's begin. Psychosis is defined by the American Psychiatric Association as the extreme condition of losing touch with reality and good judgment. Symptoms include paranoia, grandiosity, racing thoughts, abnormal behavior, bizarre sexual activity, hallucinations, rage and compulsive lying. Churchwell's psychosis is on parade on this site. I know nothing about his chemical dependency, as referenced above by his psychiatrist.

His blog's predominant theme is hate. While he has been known to type a few harmless lines about the weather, or post snapshots, he always returns to the topics that have consumed him for years. And they are nothing if not contradictory. On a typical day, he toggles back and forth between libel attacks and grandiosity; he posts lewd pictures of teenagers and professes Elmer Gantry style outrage over lewdness; he claims to be a victim and victimizes anyone who crosses him; he brags that he was a pickpocket and accuses other people of stealing; he boasts about his anti-social experiences and claims to catch other people in shameful behavior, and believes Yahoo, MySpace and Google are in cahoots with him, and so on. In his mind boggling posts, we see that what he says and does are two very different things. Put another way, Thomas Churchwell may be the most blatant liar and hypocrite who ever drew breath.

The most telling thing he does is contradict himself. When you wonder about a particular contradiction, he will deny ever writing it, though it may literally have been only a day since he wrote it—how could you think he'd ever say that? You're a wacko! He will contradict FACTS. He will lie to you about conversations you had with him. He will misquote you to yourself. Typically, he writes poison post titles about me that start with the lie: "SCARLETT ADMITS" and what follows are more horrific lies. When you catch him in a lie, he will say that you are the one who's lying, making stuff up, and you are a wacko.

Forensic psychologist Dr. Robert Hare, author of Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of Psychopaths Among Us, said this about psychopathic liars, and it fits Churchwell to a T:

"When caught in a lie and challenged, he makes up new lies."

Psychopaths have always existed. Most, like Churchwell, come from low socio-economic backgrounds. Most are males. They have been studied using various techniques, perhaps the same techniques that Churchwell's psychiatrist used to diagnose him, and through the years their problems have been blamed on various causes. But one thing never varies: all anti-social people share four common characteristics. They are all very egocentric, they have no empathy for others, they are incapable of feeling remorse, and they are very manipulative.

Far from being killers, on the whole, psychopaths tend to harm people in ways other than murder. They are not always serial killers, Norman Bates poster boys, or greedy, cut-throat CEOs. Many are hostile creeps like Churchwell, who enjoy making life difficult for others. Competitive to an extreme, they regularly lie and turn ordinary interactions into struggles to the death. This is how Churchwell conducts himself on the Web, and strangely enough, he believes that blogging should be for him alone. He will go to a blog to derail a conversation with libel, and if another blogger calls him on his lies, he will go after that person, too. The right that other people should have to blog peacefully means nothing to him. Which leads us to what psychopaths do that is truly shocking: an ability to focus their undivided attention on people, until they ruin them. Some clinicians have compared this to the concentration with which a predator stalks his prey. Churchwell calls it "winning". A couple of years ago, he posted snapshots on a MSN amateur photography site, and when the moderator offered him a bit of helpful criticism, Churchwell lambasted the poor man for weeks, calling him a "phony, crappy nobody," among other slurs. Sound familiar? He has been trying for three years to drive me off the Internet with lies that are identical to those he wrote about the moderator. As a predictable collorary, anti-social people feel most comfortable with those who they perceive as being one step down from them. They shift their obsessive natures away from defeating those who are trying to get ahead and toward those they perceive as already having made it. Churchwell demonstrates the utmost benevolence toward underage girls who look like Diane Arbus prototypes, and who will never be models, yet when he encounters people who earn their livings as writers, magicians and photographers, he attacks them like a rabid dog. Those people, in his opinion, "need to be taken down a notch," although he would never admit that he is jealous. Psychopaths thrive on winning. How many times has Churchwell published lies about me, or someone else, and then screamed like a highly immature adolescent: "I WON!" and "GOTCHA!" Too many times to count. Although his "victory dance" is often short lived, before he starts to feel bored again, smearing professional people and beating us to a bloody pulp on the Web is his definite objective.

In her book Invisible Eden, Maria Flook got this chilling quote from Churchwell, and it may be the only honest thing that he has ever said: "I love messing up people's heads."

Psychopaths hate the world. Consumed by envy and suspicion, they are incapable of forming normal attachments. Occasionally, they may team up with a disordered individual like themselves, if it suits their purposes, and some even marry, but knowing a psychopath is like riding in a car with no brakes. It's no wonder this type is drawn to the Internet. Technology is a great gift to cyber bullies and cyber stalkers. They used to sit outside their targets' home—hiding in cars or bushes—waiting to follow them. They used to leave threatening notes on their windshields before slashing their tires. But now they have moved into the 21st century, using modern technology to terrorize their victims. They have an uncanny ability for recognizing nice, caring women and can sniff out potential victims seemingly through their computer screens. Churchwell got lucky in the niceness arena, when he met me on an Internet forum in 2006.

I have written about his vindictiveness and how he began to attack me the day after I ended those short-lived phone conversations with him in 2006. What you may not know is that his abrupt change from decent (though odd) treatment on the phone to outright abuse was very shocking and bewildering, and so unlike my normal experience that it was a long time before I realized that my being nice to him was what triggered his nasty reaction. Once he knew that I was nice, he expected to be able to use me like an appliance and shove me around like a piece of furniture. When I objected to his behavior, then he thought that obviously I was a wacko, or else I'd let him do whatever he wanted with me. When I got so uppity as to tell him that I didn't want to talk with him anymore because of his tall tales, then he went bonkers—just like that, trashing me on his blog with unbelievable lies. I was suddenly a broken toaster oven. Once a psychopath knows that you are sincere, he'll suck you dry like Dracula—demand all your time, be more work than a newborn—and test you with tiresome demands and power plays. In his world, sincerity is a weakness and trying to "understand" him is asking to be hurt, so be careful; he will hurt you without blinking. He can't, or won't, trust, so he will constantly test you - an example was when Churchwell unsuccessfully pressured me for nude pictures. If you won't submit to the tyranny, then you will be bullied as "a moron," "a waste of time," "If you liked me, you would do whatever I ask," "I give up on you," and "You're a wacko."

He has a weird sense of time. It's as if he is not aware that the passage of time changes people, and generally makes them less gullible, or maybe he just isn't aware of time passing at all. Three years have gone by and he has spent them arguing obsessively to rationalize his awful treatment of me, heatedly battling the wacko (as he calls me) with name calling and finger-pointing in cruel and vulgar rants. It is also in this vein that he has worked on my readers and tried to destroy my photography career, repeatedly telling the Internet that I have no talent or ethics, and that I'm a "photo thief," and so on.

Here's a typical lie Churchwell posted on Google Groups. He listed every blog he could find with his name in it, and then wrote:

"These are hate site (sic) created by a cyber bully who is now writing "Parody" on the blogs in hope to keep them up but they are not parody blogs and she makes sure to get what she writes on Google listing first before writing parody so people will read her hate in Google listing. She has been doing this for 3 years now and she attacks everyone in my family incluing (sic) my mother and my little girl."

First, if he had a nickel for every time he has exploited his family in his libel schemes, and that includes his grown daughter, he surely would have enough money by now to get off the welfare rolls. Here was an actual reply from a reader who wasn't fooled:

"I think this is funny. I also think that you did, in fact, write these blogs and posted them here to get people to read them. I also believe that no one gives a crap about this. No where in there did I see an attack on you or your family. I also doubt that you are who your name says you are. I believe you are the author of these blogs."

Many people see through his lies immediately. So, why doesn't he stop? This is a question that all cyber victims ask themselves.

An anonymous comment posted on a victim resource site:

"What surprises me is even when the psychopath stalker has been caught out, he still DOES IT! He carries on! It's an obsession! He doesn't stop thinking about himself long enough to realize his victims are smart and can call him on his behavior! The psychopath will still stand there and in plain sight proclaim that "he is the victim." It's a wonder how they can carry on after being exposed, yet we all know it's a compulsion."

I wish that woman the best of luck.

Anti-social people are typically "street smart", so one clue why Churchwell continues to lie is that he boasts about being able to trick people. He seems to think people are too dumb to ever figure out that he is a pathological liar. Another clue is what the American Psychiatric Association calls "duping gratification". A psychopath will twist the truth just for the fun of putting something over on someone. The lies Churchwell tells are very stupid, but psychopaths pay so much attention to "winning," they fail to hear warning bells. Further, there is something outright evil about his lies about women. This may be the result of some long ago trauma at the hands of a woman, faulty brain wiring, or perhaps he was born that way. Whatever the cause, clinical research shows that psychopathy does not suddenly spring into existence in adulthood. The symptoms appear in early life.

And what about his victims? Some victims, such as the photo site moderator mentioned above, or that male writer who Churchwell cruelly libeled a "drunk," say nothing and hope that the bully will go away. But sometimes a victim is tempted to give a long explanation to prove the bully's allegations false. I have done that here, of course. On those occasions when I have asserted my right not to be libeled, a paranoid fear of exposure seems to compel him to silence me immediately. These attacks also include the common tactic: "My fans say you are a freak" and "Everyone wants you to go away." This is standard bully-speak. Churchwell has no fans. He just likes the idea of hiding behind an imaginary mob, much like a toddler will hide behind his mother. It also is a variation on: "Nobody reads your blog" and "It must suck to be you."

Don't be fooled into believing that what he writes has any validity - it doesn't. He is actually describing himself. Author Melton said this about projection:

“Keep one simple fact always in mind, regardless of whether he is borderline, narcissistic, psychopathic or sadistic: Whenever he is criticizing characteristics in you, he is making autobiographical statements about himself. Listen closely to the hateful things he says to you about you. You are listening to verbatim descriptions of his character defects. This is extremely important to remember, especially in the midst of verbal attack. These are the only moments when you will hear the truth about the man who lies concealed behind the steel wall of his personality disorder.”

So, Churchwell projects his anti-social behavior onto others; he accuses others of deviant behavior that he is guilty of himself. Additionally, something should be said about his feigned victimhood, since it always follows attacks that are particularly nasty. If he starts to think that maybe this time he will be held accountable for his behavior, he immediately will turn on the water works. Playing to the emotions of others is one of his manipulative tricks, and it commonly takes the form of self-pity, phony indignation, pretending to be misunderstood ("Me hate women? I love women!"), claiming that he's the one being bullied or harassed or stalked, claiming to be deeply offended, martyrdom ("I wonder how much longer I will live..."), claiming a scary past ("I think my father was in the Mafia.."), and even claiming religious persecution, and a poor-me drama ("I am mentally ill..." and "I gave up magic because of the death of Christa Worthington...", "I am the victim of a wacko ...," and "I am the one being bullied..."). All of these tales portray himself as the downtrodden victim.

Standing head and shoulders above Churchwell's pile of feigned excuses and victimhood tales is this whopper: "I'LL KEEP WRITING ABOUT SCARLETT UNTIL SHE STOPS ATTACKING ME AND MY FAMILY AND GOES AWAY." Translation: Every time Scarlett exposes me as a liar, I will get even!

Those of us who have had an experience with psychopaths know that their language is two-dimensional. They are, as someone once said, as "deep as a thimble." An analogy is given by Dr. Hare of a psychopath as a color blind person who has learned how to function in the world of color by certain strategies. He may tell you that he "stopped at a red light," but what he really means is that he knew the light at the top means "stop," so he stopped. He calls it the "red" light like everyone else, but he has no experience of what "red" looks like. Psychopaths use words about emotions the same way people who are color blind use words about colors they cannot perceive. They not only learn how to use the words, and repeat the same words over and over, they also learn to pantomime the feeling. But they never HAVE the feeling.

According to experts, persecutory thoughts often combine with delusions of grandeur: defined as the gross exaggeration of one's own importance, power, or talents. Delusions of grandeur abound on the Churchwell blogs and can be found in recent posts where he wrote that he is a "witch" (perhaps meaning warlock?), a psychic, a successful photographer, a famous retired magician, and that he used to know and date celebrities such as Brooke Shields! Delusional types are convinced that they are special, unique, famous, or know someone who is famous. Or, notorious. Churchwell is just as likely to say that he is a "member of the press" who photographed Cardinal Egan up close and personal, as to claim that he was pals with the psychopathic wife slasher O.J. Simpson.

Read what others say about Churchwell's occult delusions on this thread.

As for his failure to have a productive life, anti-social people rarely hold a job for long. His old girlfriend from twenty years ago reports that he couldn't even keep a Santa Claus job in a department store for more than one day. According to her, he lost his marbles after he and other store employees were filmed for a segment that was to air on a local TV channel. The camera crew got only one distant shot of Churchwell, and no one recognized him on TV. The next day, feeling slighted, Churchwell refused to get out of bed. It was much the same story in 1996 when he was hired as a 'table-hopper' magician in a bar and "worked," by his own account, as a pickpocket in a strip club.

In Invisible Eden, Maria Flook wrote about that time in his life: "T.C. was no longer a rising star but was more like a disabled satellite orbiting the same seedy wee-hour solar system, night after night."

Normal people work for a goal, even if the goal is only a paycheck. Normal people measure things by how much they have to spend (in time, work, energy) to get the desired results. They want to goof off from time to time, usually wanting as much free time as they can get to pursue their own pleasures and interests. Anti-social people might work for a goal, too, but it's a different goal: they want power, authority, adulation. Yet, they don't understand how people achieve these things; they think it's all arbitrary, it's all appearances, it's all who you know. They often try to attach themselves to those who already have what they want, as Churchwell did with two magicians.

To read what magicians really think of him, go here and here.

And go here to read an entry about him on the Urban Dictionary website, written by one of the magicians he ripped off.

It appears that Churchwell was not invested in magic—whatever he may have produced was something he did sporadically. Clearly, he didn't pay attention to stuff like diligence, ethics, and honing his craft, preferring instead to leech off, or demean, those who were successful. Psychopaths feel entitled to whatever they can take. They expect special indulgences, and they also feel entitled to use people. The idea of working for a paycheck, of competing in the work place with other men and with women, is anathema to Churchwell. Of course, he has no time to earn a living anyway, since he is hard at work being a liar, cyber bully and stalker.

Ironically, people like Churchwell actually receive a disability check from the government so that they are able to spend their entire day attacking people on the Internet. Before he started blogging, he managed to qualify for monthly disability benefits by satisfying certain criteria for manic depression, according to him. Which means he may have qualified under any of the eight mental disabilities listed on the Social Security website; personality disorders are included. In order for a claimant to get benefits, psychiatrists must state that he can no longer perform his past work, or any other type of work, that he has repeated episodes of decompensation (mind deterioration), and ongoing difficulties in maintaining social functioning. Manic depression, also called bipolar disorder, is characterized by mood changes that swing from depression to mania, with periods of normalcy between the two extremes. There are online articles explaining the "mood cycling" involved in this disorder, and the differences between a mood disorder and a personality disorder. One of the hallmarks of manic depression is guilt. As most of us know, guilt is a feeling of responsibility or remorse for something wrong we have done. It is our conscience judging us for our actions and thoughts. In people who are bipolar, guilt feelings seem to come from nowhere, and often there is no outside source. When they harm other people through their actions or words, they feel remorseful afterwards. Generally, they are profoundly sorry for hurting others. Contrast that with Churchwell, who has never demonstrated remorse for anything he has done to others. If he is bipolar, then surely this is only part of his problem, and it is his personality disorder, characterized by steady hate, compulsive lying, and a total absence of guilt, which is responsible for the misery caused by him on the blogs. I will close the paragraph by adding this. I loved a wonderful man who suffered with manic depression. Believe me. He was nothing like the anti-social thug Thomas Churchwell.

If someone you know is a psychopath, watch out. They feel that the rules don't apply to them, and they will always cause trouble wherever they think they can get away with it, not to mention alienating family, co-workers, clients and friends with their arrogance, lies, and malice. They become enraged over simple disagreements, plus they have evil mouths and will say ANYTHING. If you live or work with them—or find yourself in the same blogosphere with them—expect big trouble sooner or later.

A quote from a satire site, by "Frank the Psychopath":

"I don’t think I feel things the same way you do. It’s like… at my first job. I was stealing maybe a thousand bucks a month from that place. And this kid, he was new, he got wise. And he was going to turn me in, but before he got the chance I went to the manager and pinned the whole thing on him. Kid lost his job, the cops got involved, I don’t know what happened to him. And I guess something like that is supposed to make me feel bad, right? It’s supposed to hurt, right? But instead, it’s like there’s nothing..."

That quote is uncannily similar to comments Churchwell makes on his blogs. Although anti-social types often steal from others, they never experience feelings of shame, guilt or remorse. They are legally sane—they do know right from wrong—but they refuse to accept any responsibility for their actions. Instead, they accuse others of wrongdoing. Dr. Hare refers to psychopaths as being morally insane.

A recap of excuses that Churchwell and other psychopaths use to avoid responsibility in all situations:

* Justifying: "I CAN'T HELP IT. I'M MENTALLY ILL."

* Blame shifting: "YOU ASKED FOR IT!"

* Play Acting: "I AM A VICTIM!"

* Entitlement: "IF I WANT TO DO IT, I CAN."

* Grandiosity: "I AM SMARTER THAN YOU! YOU ARE A DUMMY!"

* Projection: "YOU ARE A BULLY, STALKER, LIAR, THIEF, WACKO!"

And let's not forget this biggie, which is closely tied to all the rest: Leaving out major sections of any incident and inserting his own loony spin. Rewriting history to suit himself.

As we slosh through the cesspool of lies and manufactured excuses, we always come back to what he told Maria Flook in that interview: "I LOVE MESSING UP PEOPLE'S HEADS."

Shouldn't he feel embarrassment and shame for what he has done to me and others? He should, but he has no deep-seated emotions. No empathy, not even a morsel of compassion or concern for other people. Thomas Churchwell is completely amoral, or perhaps, he has the morals of a bright two-year-old. Which brings me back to his diabolical lies. You've heard of a magician's bag of tricks? Churchwell, a failed magician, has a bagful of lies that he uses for the purpose of trying to destroy my life. When he starts to feel bored with one lie, he tosses it back into the bag, and pulls out another. Did I mention that he's been doing this for three years? The following are links, in no particular order, to my archive posts that set the record straight about this psychopath's big bag of lies.

The truth is here:

The child porno writer lie
The phone message lie
The Susan and I are the same person lie
The "I never threatened to kill Scarlett" lie
The hate blogger lie
The nudie pictures lie
The photo thief lie
The photo thief lie redux
The stalker lie
The "Scarlett is attacking my family" lie

If I have forgotten a lie, readers, just read my whole blog.

H.M. Cleckley writes in The Mask Of Sanity:

"One almost amusing example of how psychopaths lie can be exemplified by a man who's footprint was discovered at the scene of the crime. "No, that's not my foot" he said, even though everyone knew he was lying."

Before I wrote the first post on this blog, I tried to convince Churchwell to stop telling lies by appealing to his better nature. But I found out that appealing to his better nature was about as effective as spitting in the sea. What you see is what you get: he has no better nature. The fundamental problem, again, is that he doesn't have a conscience. He won't take other people's feelings into consideration and he overlooks an obvious fact, that other people will react when abused or exploited and that most people get REALLY pissed off by being lied to, or lied about. He treats people like dirt.

It is ironic that two of his favorite lies are to call people perverts and thieves. Ironic and so contradictory, in view of the fact his deviant history includes posting lewd pictures of underage girls, and stealing magic tricks (according to several magic forums), and stealing the copyright of my commercial photograph, and boasting that he once was a pickpocket, among other weirdness. Again, these are prime examples of how he projects his own behavior onto others. The pretense that his screwball allegations about me are part of a morality campaign, of all things, and that he is Snow White, is another lie designed to dupe the Internet along with the mental health professionals.

Never in my life have I encountered such a damaging person. If I hadn't stopped carrying his lies around with me like suitcases, I probably would have had a nervous breakdown. There was a period of time two years ago when I remember looking in the mirror and feeling like I was the most worthless human being to ever walk the earth. Churchwell's attacks did that to me. This was when I had recently lost my parents and was dealing with depression, a result of my mother and father dying within 11 months of each other. A couple of years before that, I had lost my fiancé tragically. I was vulnerable, in other words. I actually believed, when I met Churchwell on that message board a few months later, that my young 60-year-old parents would have recovered from the heart disease and cancer, if I had just prayed harder for their recovery and devoted myself to their care 24 hours a day. Believing myself a failure, I was ripe for buying into the awful things that Churchwell was saying about me on his hate sites. I think that is part of the hook of being in the same blogosphere with disordered people; victims want to prove that they aren’t the way the hater says they are. I know this was true for me. I would get so close to the proverbial delete button and then he would say something so outrageous that I couldn’t stand to close my blog without defending my character and proving him wrong. Even after I came to terms with my grief, I continued to defend myself against his lies. Defending myself against his scurrilous attacks, or dodging them like arrows, had become an unwanted habit.

As readers know, he told Blogland that I was a pornographer, thief, hater, liar and stalker after I had lost sleep, work, and suffered so much that I ended up in the hospital with pleurisy. Not content with stopping there, he mocked my illness, claimed crazily that I posted he gave me "flu on the Internet" and continued to attack me, even while I was hospitalized. His emotional abuse was (and still is) a strategic move to break me down—and "level the playing field" to make it appear that I am just like him. "Throw enough mud and some of it will stick," is his motto.

Here's a link to an article about stress and the immune system.

Before I soldier on with my experiences, I want to share what happened to a friend of mine from the UK. She had been communicating for over a year with a man who lived in Florida, and during the time of their correspondence and phone calls, he seemed so "sweet, caring, and kind." She mentioned how he had grieved over his dead wife, and so on.

This man asked my friend to marry him, and, to top it off, he promised her that he had a terrific job lined up for her in the city where he lived. My friend believed him and came to the United States to marry him.

At their first meeting she mentioned how it was the beginning of the end, and she should have seen it coming. She told him, after they met at the airport, that she needed to make a phone call, but instead of letting her use his cell phone, he coldly told her to use the pay phone. She noticed how this contradicted his warm personality on the phone and in emails. She said she was shocked, but being naive, she married him anyway.

As the weeks went by, things got worse. She found out that he had lied about the terrific job. Next, she began to get phone calls from two women in Canada who told her that her new husband had been inviting them, via online chats, to live with him! My friend was distraught and told these women that he was lying to them. The women didn't believe it (why do women tend to doubt another woman when she is trying to warn them?), so my friend said, "If you want proof that I am married to him, come down here and you can see for yourselves."

Eventually, she learned from his family that Mr. Wonderful was a pathological liar who had a long history of using women and having his mother cover his tracks. I don't want anyone else to go through what my friend and I experienced. It is my hope that this post will provide a bit of support to others who live, work, or blog with psychopaths. I'm sorry that I cannot also provide a solution, but since a prime characteristic of anti-social people is believing that they are always right, no matter what, they are extremely resistant to change and, unfortunately, tend to get worse as they get older. I know this is true of Churchwell; he is worse now than three years ago, when he started blogging. The key, then, is prevention; learning how to recognize losers, before they can damage you. I hope that more women will become informed, so that they will not become victims themselves.

Pathological liars are also pathological attention seekers. More than anything else, they crave attention. It doesn't matter if the attention is positive or negative, as long as they get attention. Churchwell basks in the "narcissistic hits" (narcissistic supply) that he gets from reading my posts, and from the knowledge that others are reading them, too. Although he denies every terrible truth about himself, he enjoys the attention nonetheless. As Freud said of narcissists, these people act like they're in love with themselves. And they are in love with a fantasy of themselves—or they want you to be in love with their fantasy self; it's hard to tell just what is going on.

Lying is the most common complaint about narcissists. Fragile ego, a need for adulation, fishing for pity, and expecting other people to defer to them are also signs of the disorder. Narcissists are quick to blame others when their expectations are not met. They react like hornets to criticism, and when they are rejected, they vilify the person who rejected them. Thus, Churchwell's attacks on me. Their lack of insight is breathtaking and often leads them to wildly misinterpret other people's motives. Churchwell's preoccupation with himself has always obstructed his ability to see people as they really are, obstructed even his ability to perceive bloggers as separate people! For a long time, he was convinced that the bully Susan and I were the same person, even though she and I are nothing alike, obviously.

Psychologist Theodore Milton has written about two primary types of narcissists: the elitists, who often become successful leaders, and the fanatic type, which describes Churchwell. The fanatic narcissist is a severely narcissistically wounded individual, usually with major paranoid tendencies, who has an illusion of omnipotence. These people are fighting the reality of their insignificance and are trying to re-establish their self-esteem through grandiose fantasies. When unable to gain recognition or support from others, they often take on the role of a warrior on a grandiose mission. Thus, Churchwell's obsession to rid the Internet of his perceived enemies, claiming that we are stalkers, thieves and pornographers. He has wrongly accused at least four people of being pornographers. Fanatics can be found among cult leaders, in mental hospitals if their delusions become sustained and extensive, or in prison, if their missions counteract those of society.

Grandiosity can take many forms. Like Narcissus gazing at his reflection, narcissistic men are obsessed with their looks, the same as narcissistic women. One of the first things Churchwell said to me on the phone was, "I hate getting old." But male narcissists are more likely than women to get hung up on the 'specialness' of their work - in Churchwell's case, the "work" is his hate blog, which means if he is spewing on his blog, by definition it is more special and important than anyone's nice blog. People with narcissistic personality disorder overestimate their abilities and inflate their accomplishments, while underestimating and devaluing the accomplishments of everyone else. Churchwell does that constantly. Like psychopaths, narcissists are very envious. They also have those strange religious ideas, in particular believing that they are God's special favorites. God loves them, so they are exempt from ordinary rules; God tells them they are omnipotent, so they can do anything they feel like. Conveniently, the narcissist's God has strict rules for everyone else! Churchwell's recurring fantasy that he is a persecuted Jew fits with his fantasy of being a victim on the Internet, and not the victimizer. Always contemptuous of others, he makes insulting, mocking and crude comments about women, as if auditioning for an episode on Jerry Springer. A person like Churchwell who is quoted in Invisible Eden as comparing a certain part of a woman's anatomy to a computer trackball, is either a narcissist, emotionally retarded, a loathsome misogynist, or all three.

But, I digress. The intoxicating high Churchwell gets from reading a post about himself wears off after a few days, or within minutes, and then he must try to provoke another reaction. As he has demonstrated many times, failure to provoke a response from his victims is wounding to him. It makes him feel panicky.

I should point out here that many of his attacks on me failed to get a response. I defended myself against his continuous libel in just thirty-something posts over a period of three years. To some of you, that may seem like thirty-something posts too many, but let me tell you, if your character was being defiled on the Internet, and your livelihood threatened by a determined psychopath/narcissist bent on destroying you, then you just might need to defend yourself occasionally. I learned long ago that keeping silent doesn't stop the abuse. Recently, he posted more libel on a sleazy site that caters to sadomasochists, where, not surprisingly, he is a member. Of course, the link ended up in the Google blog listings. What he wrote about me was hideous, yet this was one of many times when I didn't bother to defend myself. See my archives for the sex "story" that he posted on a kiddie porn website, in which he impersonated a certain male blogger.

His name calling, in particular, has been a sign that I am silently winning one battle, if not the war. He is telling me that I do know what I'm talking about when I describe him as a psychopath.

I take it as backhanded validation when he "critiques" every word in my blog in the nasty style of a psychopath. I also have an idea how Maria Flook may have reacted, had she known that Churchwell plagiarized her insightful chapter in Invisible Eden, describing his brief romance with socialite Christa Worthington, six years before she was stabbed to death by her garbage collector. When Churchwell put that chapter on his blog, readers saw how he had scribbled snide comments over the text and all along the margins, obviously hating what Flook had written about him. (You can download the entire text here and read a brief biography of the author here.) He has spent years trashing this author. Paradoxically, he pimps her book, his obvious purpose being to lure readers to his blog with cheesy tabloid headlines: "YES, I WAS THE BOYFRIEND OF CHRISTA WORTHINGTON IN INVISIBLE EDEN!" On other sites, he makes disgusting comments such as this: "IN INVISIBLE EDEN I AM PEPPERED THROUGH THE WHOLE BOOK AND HAVE MY OWN CHAPTER ON PAGE 288 CALLED "THE AMAZING TARQUIN." Since he desperately wants to be famous, or infamous, he is not above exploiting his short-lived relationship with a woman who was brutally murdered. To those of us who read the book, he comes across as a seedy bar magician, a moocher, unstable, and a source of comic relief for the sometimes meaningful relationships that filled Christa Worthington's short, tragic life. Flook aptly described Churchwell's personality during her interview of him in 2002 as "exibitionistic." Interestingly, she also relates in her book that Churchwell sent her numerous "heated emails that were incendiary, sensational and always wacky." Sound familiar? Now that I have reposted a tiny portion of his bona fide, genuine psychiatric diagnostic assessment in this post, he will step up his written attacks on me, just as he did to Maria Flook and others.

Michael O'Keefe, lead prosecutor in the Worthington case, described Churchwell as a "nutcase." There you have it. One guideline for dealing with this type of person is: don't respond, don't interact and don't engage. As I stated above, this is not as easy as it sounds. From my own experience I know it is natural to want to defend yourself and set the record straight. However, I finally learned that trying to reason with him was like trying to reason with a screaming toddler. Of course, toddlers develop and mature and act out for only a brief period, after which they are on the road to becoming grown ups, whereas bullies never grow up. Churchwell's response, upon reading this post, will be more bizarre "critiquing" and name calling; so immature and childish, as to be beyond the belief of any adult.

Yet this is not merely the case of a bully who is unbelievably crude, immature and mean. People who spend their lives attacking people on the Internet are afflicted with a form of sadism. They find joy in hurting others. They are psychopaths. Churchwell's lust for causing pain is evident in what he chooses to write about me and other innocent people. Along with spewing vile lies on his blog, he also irritates everyone by flooding a group with drivel on completely neutral sites. A few months ago, he went to the ABC News website and posted libel about me. This week, it was the Deviant art website. Since it is unlikely that any intelligent person would be favorably impressed or influenced upon reading hate comments written under the guise of "warning" others about a victim, it is obvious that his goal is to find excitement from being a sadistic pest.

Psychopaths are loners; narcissists are dependent and clingy. I think it is not going out on a limb now to conclude that Thomas Churchwell is afflicted with both of these disorders. Anti-social people share many of the same characteristics, including grandiosity, compulsive lying, hostility and a lack of conscience, but psychopaths are more willing to use physical violence to get what they want, whereas narcissists rarely commit physical assaults, though they occasionally strike out in an impulse of rage. Indeed, Churchwell still brags on his site about the time he was locked up in Rikers Prison for severely beating a man and blinding him for life.

This is my last commentary on him. My other blog—which was not even about him—is closed now due to the harassment that I experienced on a daily basis, so disturbing that I had to close the comment section on both blogs. It is true that he has written literally hundreds of abusive comments on my blogs, including death threats. Of course, it excites him immeasurably to read about this again.

Some of the threats are posted on this site. Here is one:

"SOMEONE ASKED ME WHAT I WOULD DO IF I FOUND OUT WHERE SHE LIVED. MY RESPONSE IS: I WOULD SHOOT HER 1OOO TIMES. EVEN AFTER SHE WAS DEAD I WOULD CONTINUE TO SHOOT."

Sickening, isn't it? I have always known that either he would eventually stop his attacks on me, or I would have to leave the blogs, unless I was willing to tolerate his ongoing hate antics forever. Since he doesn't view me as a human being having feelings, opinions and rights, but as an object to be manipulated for his entertainment, he will never allow me to blog in peace. If I stayed, he would continue to play his disordered mind games: the blaming game, the justification game, the devaluation game, the projecting game, the minimizing game, and so on. He can do them all, there are no limits to the games he plays, and he is convinced that he will always come out the winner, even though men who verbally attack and threaten women are total losers.

Trying to bolster himself by libeling others isn't the way to go, and you might think he would have wised up to that by now. Instead, he spews at the end of his tirades: "YOUR MOVE, DUMMY!" It is as if he is permanently condemned to "mess up people's heads" using a juvenile dictionary.

I have never been able to escape him. He has been the thorn in my side, and the stone in my shoe. I think that he will forever consider me to be a person who failed him, who abandoned his narcissistic needs in 2006. Years after I broke off those silly conversations with him, he still watches me, harasses me, keeps tabs on me, furiously copies everything I write, and alters my words, still plays that 3-year-old phone message, tries to destroy my career, threatens me, tells vindictive lies about me, and stalks my blog. Are you sitting down? A few weeks ago, I received an email inviting me to join him for online chats! His behavior is truly psychotic. I haven't talked very much about his stalking in this post, but it has been ongoing for three years now, and is seemingly endless.

After reposting the psychiatrist's quote regarding Thomas Churchwell's psychosis, I could have ended this long commentary right there, perhaps. As for my belief that another hospitalization is in the offing, psychopaths and narcissists are difficult to treat—if they ever even show up for therapy. In Churchwell's mind, he is not doing anything wrong; if there's a problem, it's your problem, not his. Furthermore, as Dr. Hare points out, all they do in therapy is learn more about human nature, and then use this knowledge to continue to plunder humanity. Therapy works only when someone wants to change and, though psychopaths and narcissists hate their real selves, they don't want to change—they want the world to change. Short of nonstop hospitalization, or neurosurgery, there seems to be no effective (and legal) way to protect society from these people. They typically do not stop their destructive behavior until they are either dead or in jail.

Thomas Churchwell's violence towards me takes the form of verbal assault, which survivors of abuse will tell you is every bit as damaging emotionally as being beaten with an abuser's fists. When he does it again, I won't defend myself. When it comes to words, he will always win in his mind. He has no insight, which makes any effort to confront him on a blog completely useless. Moreover, all the name calling and allegations that he makes about me, and others, are actually true confessions and revelations about himself. He is a great big projection machine. I will ignore it. If you are a blogger and the victim of a psychopathic bully, or narcissist, I hope you will do the same, out of respect not only for your readers, but also for your own well being.

My blog recap with photos is on this page.

Tomorrow Is Another blog? Not with Cyber Bullies around, you know

2009-05-29T17:25:00.591-04:00

Several weeks ago, I closed my other blog. The URL and front page are still up, so that the cyber bullies can't use the address—one of them used to grab discarded URLs. I am posting the blog's final entry here as well. This is an appropriate place for it.

(May 15, 2009) This is an unpleasant topic, and I am going to spend as little time on it as possible. The operative word is "try", because I am a talkative soul by nature.

A friend of mine started a blog a few years ago, and was attacked by a very nasty bully in her first week. His vicious comments shook her up so badly that she closed the blog down. In her case, it was a drive-by bully, the kind of nastiness that she characterized as a zoo animal screeching at anyone walking by its cage. Random meanness. I wholly respected my friend's decision to quit, but I also believed (then) that you DON'T STOP blogging because of a cyber bully.

Bullies are unhappy, bored, disturbed, or just plain mean enough to want to take it out on someone else. Bullies are looking for a diversion from their own misery. They will take any attention they can get, even if it's negative attention, and ignoring them usually doesn't make them go away.

For three years I have been stalked by two persistent bullies. One of them is a woman. She is obsessed with the other bully. Fully aware of his hatred for me (and the rest of the world), she is not above using dirty tricks to get his attention. Among her tricks, she has written emails to him in my name and posted comments in my name, and ADMITTED it. She goads him into attacking me. But what makes her a bit unusual for a bully is that she can switch allegiances in the blink of an eye. Just as she is capable of attacking me, she is every bit as capable of reviling him, and has done so exhaustively on her blogs, and on other sites. If this description of her sounds like a contradiction, she is that. You never know where you stand with Susan.

You might be new here and thinking: Oh, boy, two women are having a cat fight! Wrong. Anyone who has read the blogs knows that I have never been a combative blogger. Susan, on the other hand, positively lives to fight. If you go to gretawire.blogs.foxnews.com, you will see her nasty comments, posted under the aliases Suzi, Sammie, Deb, Kay and Jane, among other names. She regularly slams the women commenters on that board for no reason and even attacks the journalist and blogmaster, Greta Susteren, who has called her a "miserable person".

Though Susan and the other (main) bully, Thomas Churchwell, don't have jobs, both are hard at work slurring the reputations of good people. Today, Susan, having nothing else to do, found a post on some blog and accused me of plagiarizing it. She flooded my inbox with vindictive emails all day, sent copies of every email to Bully No. 1, and even wrote that my dog doesn't exist!

To understand why she came unhinged again, you have to know what happened yesterday. I stumbled upon a Tweet of hers, via a link to my blog that I saw on my site meter. When I clicked on her page, I saw this:

Enjoying Churchwell's photos.
12:42 PM Apr 4th from web

In an email to me, Susan tried to pass off the Tweet as "sarcasm." What? To anyone who can read English, or is familiar with the two bullies' long time cyber cat and mouse games, the phrase "enjoying churchwell's photos" had to be a complement. A puzzling and highly contradictory complement, when you consider that Susan has laughed at Churchwell's photography for years. She and many others. I think she was embarrassed and pissed that I saw it, figuring I never would, since I don't usually go to the twitter site, or maybe she just forgot it was on her page.

And her accusation one day later that I plagiarized a blog post? See the paragraph above. This was similar to her attack on me last fall, when she hissed at Churchwell in emails, "I hope you're going to write a post about Scarlett!" I would not intentionally use another author's words, though I have seen it happen, innocently enough, on others' blogs. Like many who use the Internet daily, I read, absorb, AND retain a lot of material, so it's possible that something I read found its way into a post. No one cares if I made a mistake, bully.

Her hypocrisy is mind boggling. She admitted to me once that she copied some author's post to her suzispeaks site, and published it as her own. This was in the fall of 2007. I'm even giving it a voice is because SHE NEEDS TO LOOK IN THE FRICKING MIRROR.

On two separate occasions she has attacked me. Outrageous, mean and vile attacks, considering that I did NOTHING to warrant them, never said one negative thing about her before the first attack (my three-year-old phone message, in which I described her as a "fifth grader" for writing the first blog about the other bully, was private, of course, until he gleefully posted it). Her public attack on me last fall took mean to a whole new level. It was just breathtakingly mean. I was in fact going through a difficult time, and she made me feel like shit. LIBELING me an “alleged photographer" "hatemonger" and "Southern bigot," as she did then, might be worse than calling me a plagiarist. It's hard to say.

Though I knew about her love-hate obsession for the other bully, I was out and out stunned the first time I found out that she betrayed me. Today, it was just as galling, but it doesn't hurt. She is just going to attack anyone who questions her motives about Churchwell. As a bully she is not as obvious as Churchwell, but she is more duplicitous, because she has written about a million blog comments and emails and made about a million phone calls pretending to be my friend.

Susan is a bully and a betrayer, not a friend. And frankly, I don't give a flying rat's ass anymore about her opinion, or Churchwell's.

Last December, I tried to go my merry way. I wanted to have a nice blog. But I didn't want to ruffle the main bully's feathers by doing too much more than trying to keep up the blog. So, I wrote just a few defense posts on my other site, foolishly believing they would stop his constant libel. Meanwhile, I continued to blog here. Until he started attacking me here also, which he has done with stunning regularity. Yet, I mostly left it alone, and asked the friends I emailed to leave it alone, as well. I even was cordial when Susan commented on my site. Her double face galls me.

To sum up this post so far: Today, Bully No. 1, Thomas Churchwell, moved back a tier, and Bully No. 2 moved forward.

Just how long can an average person take abuse from a cyber bully? My friend, who closed her blog, couldn't take it more than a week. Sadly, when children and teens can't take bullying any more, some commit suicide. Churchwell started attacking me for no rational reason in 2006. Bullies target women who are nice. When I wrote my first defense post, he stepped up his attacks on me. I was so sick after those attacks, I ended up in the hospital for three days. Those kind of attacks easily could have KILLED me.

As for the other unsavory aspects of blogging: petty jealousies, cat fights, symbiosis and the rest, I never wanted any of it. If a site I read has some melodrama brewing, I go on to the next feed. When Bully No. 1 put his dirty footprints all over my comment section, I sent his abuse to its own site. You didn't find melodrama happening on this site, because I simply didn't want it.

I'm so freaking done. I'm tired of being polite and taking the high road and being called names by cyber bullies. I'm tired of being betrayed. Susan, by chasing Churchwell for three years, has done more harm to female cyber victims than she will ever understand. I'm tired of the delusional bully Churchwell lying to ensure that people don't like me.

I think right now that there are some really bad people who blog. BAD, ugly sad people. People who are miserable and want to shift the blame off their own sad little lives onto me. People who live to bully others.

Go away, you sad, mean people. And please, don't ever bother me again. I don't want to know you, I don't want your emails, and I don't want to even know you're alive.

To others reading this post, if I have another blog, it will be PRIVATE. This means that you will have a user name and password to read it. If you are unable to substantiate who you are, or refuse to do so, I wouldn't add you even if your name is Donald and your address is Trump Tower. Believe me. You will not be reading another blog of mine if you think it's okay to be pals with a hater.

Finally, to the REAL PEOPLE and FRIENDS who took the time to read my blogs, I sincerely thank you for showing up.

Many Women Are Stalked

2009-05-28T16:26:00.005-04:00

This is the face of a victim. To read her story, click here.

Three Years Later...Churchwell Still Spewing Lies About Old Phone Message

2009-04-08T19:54:00.358-04:00

Update! So much for giving it the old college try. Last week, I closed the comment section on this blog, hoping that would end Thomas Churchwell's stalking. It didn't, of course. He just took his stalking show on the road to my other blog.

You can read some of his abuse here.

It appears he wants everyone to know that being a stalker and bully are the only things he knows how to do. Today, he went back to GretaWire and posted this:

churchwell says:
April 8, 2009

The voice of a stalker who has been stalking my family for 3 years. She found my phone number and is leaving messages like we are friends. Here her say stuff like, “You took me off your IM” yes because she was a freak stalking my family and sending us pictures of nude children. Yikes

Is there anyone left in blogland who doesn't know that Thomas Churchwell is a stalker and pathological liar? He proved that he is a stalker by playing that old phone message on the Internet for three years. Now, he is playing another three-year-old message about those pictures he wanted! What kind of person does this for three years? A normal person doesn't write grotesque sexual lies about a woman and broadcast her phone messages. A normal person doesn't rape women's souls by posting their pictures, after they have asked him to stop. Has he no sense of shame? No self-respect? No guts to say "No way!" to that person who eggs him on with a "Go get her, Thomas"? What will his psychiatrist make of his latest aberrant behavior? Just what steps will he have to take to curb Churchwell's behavior? Evidently, the patient wants to be locked up again.

People flagged his filth comment on GW, which automatically threw any replies into 'comment moderation.' Here is one reply:

"The wonderful Scarlett spent a couple of weeks chatting on the Internet with this loser back in 2006. When she realized that he was a liar, she ended their chats and threw away the phone number he had given her. That is the truth. However, Churchwell wasn't about to let her go quietly. The day after she ended the conversations, he publicly attacked her on his blog. He has never stopped.

To read more about his stalking, go here.

Scarlett is not his only victim. There have been others (males, too), but Scarlett has received the brunt of the abuse, because she had the conversations with him. Let's be very clear. This was not a love affair, nor was it a friendship. Perhaps it truthfully can be described as a few conversations between a Narcissist and a Supplier. Whatever it was, ended, but it never ended for Churchwell.

Back then, Scarlett knew nothing about his child porn obsession. All she knew of his sexual life was that he liked phone sex, if lurid talk that included strangling her with a scarf while having sex was any sign. The other thing she knew was that he desperately wanted her to send him nude pictures of herself. She finally put pictures of unknown topless women on the IM for him to ogle, and he copied them to his computer. For more about the pictures, go here.

The topless women in the pictures were obviously not children, though Churchwell may have wished they were children. Click here, here, here, here, here, and here to read about his child porn fixation.

Recently, he wrote of his libel about Scarlett, "To be quite frank, I'm having fun." To read more about his sadism, go here.

Could the hate hobbyist really think that people are too stupid to understand what Scarlett was saying in that old phone message? Here is the gist of it: Scarlett was upset because Churchwell had accused her of being Susan. Susan was writing a nasty blog about him at the time (incidentally, it was the first blog ever written about him) and Scarlett had nothing to do with it. Needless to say, she didn't like being accused of writing Susan's nasty blog.

It is telling that he cut off the end of the message, when Scarlett said, "You should check yourself into a hospital." If you listen closely, you can hear the first syllable of "hospital"; the rest of the word was snipped. But even though he snipped it (and will snip the entire sentence, after reading this), he left his cackle. Here was a woman who clearly was upset, but also was trying to help him, and he was laughing at her!

He is so callous, so immature and classless that he sees nothing wrong with laughing at a woman who is crying.

Us women want to believe that men are precisely who they tell us they are. Men have these feelings about us, as well, but women generally are a bit slower to face the realities of deception. This is partly due to the knight in shining armor fairy tale, which to this day, little girls are brought up to believe wholeheartedly. When Scarlett began to realize that Churchwell was a pathological liar and the farthest thing from a knight that there could ever be, she said, ‘You lost the best thing you ever had.’ As parting words go, those didn't blaze any trails. They have been uttered by men and women since the beginning of time, no doubt. Yet Churchwell says they are the words of a "stalker!" Why? Because he's a loon and he doesn't want you to dwell on the content of the phone message—that Scarlett was fed up with his crazy accusations that she was Susan. Likewise, he never brings up the fact that Scarlett had caught him in several big lies. If you have read his disgusting blogs, then you know that no woman would stalk Thomas Churchwell, unless she happens to dig misogyny, lies, manipulation, felonies, sexual perversion, grandiosity, a past littered with short-term relationships and living on welfare. Once Scarlett put down the fairy tale, she was able to see him as he really is.

Significantly, he has kept her voice on his computer and has played her phone message on the Web for 3 years. That's a long time to obsess over a woman who wants nothing to do with you, a long time to exploit a woman's pain, and chew on sour grapes. What does this behavior say about him? To everyone except himself (and ilk), it says that he is a bully, a loon and a stalker."

That was the comment that didn't make it into GW due to his own comment being flagged. Just as well. GW is a political news blog, not a personals forum. "Open blog" on GW does not mean, hey, troll, come on over and take a dump on a nice woman. The fact that Thomas Churchwell feels entitled to dump on women proves what he is, and it isn't pretty.

I wrote this post not as an explanation, or to give "my side" of my own phone message—though who could be more qualified than me? Rather, I posted the truth about it, which some of you didn't know before reading this post. For a long time I was stunned and horrified that a man could do this to a woman. I didn't grow up around people (trash) like him. I didn't know to deal with it.

Today, I set the record straight.

For more truth about Thomas Churchwell, go here:
http://churchwelldumpingground.blogspot.com

Here’s a link to Scarlett’s other blog. You will see that she is a terrific person.

http://scarlett-tomorrowisanotherblog.blog

BTW, we suspect Thomas Churchwell's perverted outburst on GW today was another smokescreen to draw attention away from those pictures he posted of the magician.

In Loony Land With THOMAS CHURCHWELL

2009-04-07T06:55:00.011-04:00

Sometimes, it's better to try to laugh than cry...

Scene: A street corner somewhere in New Hamphire circa 1920. A youngster of 17 stands under a gas light on a cold, foggy night, blinking at girls passing by. Soon he spots a lone maiden, pretty and quite demure. He blurts that he is looking for a girl to libel. Not knowing what libel is, but terrified nonetheless, the girl utters a blood-curdling scream and runs away. The youngster's name is Thomas Churchwell. He has strawberry blond hair that he wears in a mullet. He has beady eyes. He is short. Today he was expelled from the tenth grade after he was caught in a lying frenzy. Then, he ran away from home. An alert newspaper reporter riding down the street recognizes him from a recent mug shot. "Whoa, Bessie!" he cries. Climbing down from his buggy, the reporter pulls out a sheet of parchment paper from his overcoat, and a quill, then tethers his snow white horse to the gas light pole. He walks over to the youngster.

Reporter: So, Thomas, today you were expelled from high school due to a lying frenzy then you ran away from home. What are you going to do now?

Thomas: I'm going to Loony Land!

The end.

The above "story" is fiction, just like all the posts on Thomas Churchwell's blog. I have never laughed so hard in my life as when I read his latest piece of fiction about me in the Reader.

This summary shows why:

On the Cape Cod blog, I sent an introductory email to him, because he supposedly was prostrate with grief over Christa Worthington's murder, and I felt sorry for him. Little did I know that he was using her death to get attention. This was unfortunate for me.

He was never mentioned in the Cape Cod trial.

I wasn't even AWARE of "SuziQ" until he brought her nasty blog to my attention, his voice choked with persecution. Later, when he accused me of being SuziQ (Susan), I was shocked, hurt and annoyed beyond belief.

He explained how to set up the Yahoo IM, step by step. I knew nothing about instant messaging, had never used it, or even heard of it, until he said, "Let's talk on the IM."

I did not ask for his phone number. He eagerly gave me his number and asked me to call him.

My first conversation with him was certainly not about phone sex. Once again, he is mixing me up with someone else.

I called him several times in NH? Au contraire. He called me from the bus station, and when I didn't answer, because I was at work, he instant messaged me in a snit.

I did not call about his homely date. I emailed a friendly query, after he posted a picture of her on his blog. Why did he do that? Because he wanted a reaction from me.

Still in NH, he turned on the IM one night at 2AM to see if I was there, saw my name, and satisfied, tiptoed back to bed, he says. I don't know which part of that is the funniest. It's all hysterical.

Again with the self-flagellation over "nude" pictures? Really, he needs to look into this with a competent shrink. He made a huge, disgusting mistake when he pressured me for "crotch shots," and made matters worse when he announced his disappointment over not getting any. But I wasn't scarred for life, and neither was he. He should have apologized three years ago and moved on!

I did not send him 1970 pictures, unless I sent him my baby picture. I don't think I did.

I did not say that I wanted to visit him in NY. He asked if he could come HERE, which startled me, since he was a total stranger on the Internet. He wanted to move in with me "for a few weeks" he told me, just as he did with Christa, Jamie and Laurie. He told me that he wanted to IMPREGNATE me.

I did not say that I wanted to have a relationship with him. Where does he get this hackneyed dialog? Sounds like he copied it from an Archie comic book.

Now, the next two lies made me laugh the hardest. He claims that I "begged" him for phone sex and he replied: "Ok, go ahead." Hilarious. Then, he says: "I was just trying to get it over with." {hand clapped to forehead} So, THAT'S why he came three times in one day! He was just trying to get it over with...LMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!

One thing is not funny in the least. The fact that Thomas Churchwell is still obsessed and lying about conversations that happened three fricking years ago.

He really should move on. And stop messing with the truth. Facts don't change, no matter how long he tries to spin them in Loony Land!

Blog Comments Closing

2009-04-02T23:43:00.039-04:00

As the victim of a stalker, I have read a lot on the subject of cyber stalking. I have learned that experts have different opinions as to whether it's better to speak out against a stalker's lies, or ignore them.

The general consensus is slightly tipped toward silence, the theory being that if you respond to a stalker, he will take that as encouragement; whereas if you say nothing, he may go away eventually. Most stalkers - 90% - are men.

I can't fathom Churchwell going away, because stalking is just about the only thing he does every day.

I can't picture him being anything in life except a stalker, though wouldn't it be fantastic if he proved me wrong?

For now, I'm closing the comment section on this blog to give myself some relief from Churchwell's harassment.

If you want to read the abuse that he has been sending to this blog, here's a link:

http://churchwelldumpingground.blogspot.com

MANY READ POSTS ABOUT THOMAS CHURCHWELL

2009-03-28T23:00:00.114-04:00

Update! Sometimes, the best response to lunacy is: keep it simple. I hereby present 'before and after' screenshots of a page from the Google Reader, captured for this blog half an hour ago.

The first shot shows a blue square in the bottom left side of the graph along with three blue spikes, representing the days when I posted on my blog. Additionally, there is a small orange square that says "items read," but there are no orange spikes. Why? Because the Reader shows activity in the Reader. Since I had not viewed any of my "items" (Google's word for posts) in the Reader prior to making the first screenshot, the first graph didn't register an orange spike.

You can click on the image to enlarge it:

BEFORE:

Moments later, I scrolled through all of the posts, then clicked on "show details" again, and the result is the shot below. A big orange spike.

AFTER:

Summing up, the graph has nothing at all to do with traffic on a blog. It is not a site meter. Rather, it shows the number of posts that you have viewed in the Reader.

In case the bored stalker accuses me of doctoring these screenshots (like I would know how to do that), I invite everyone to do a 'before and after' test of any blog in the Reader. You will get the same result as the one pictured above.

Random thought: Perhaps the bully is doing what his last girlfriend from 1990 said he did about practically anything. She said that if he was staring at white, he would call it black and would refuse to drop a rant even in the face of irrefutable proof. Obviously, his personality disorders have worsened since he was with her.

March 29- Stalker Thomas Churchwell sent a comment to my blog tonight, telling me to go to his hate site (like that would ever happen) because he found a graph in Google Reader that shows I have no readers. No readers? The truth is, I have more readers than ever - they are packed into the nose bleed seats now, and this largely is due to Churchwell pimping my blog in nefarious ways all over the Web.

Thomas Churchwell's Hate Comments Went Out For Cigarettes and Never Came Back

2009-03-23T12:09:00.063-04:00

March 28- Today, cyber stalker Thomas Churchwell exposed a stunning fact (said with sarcasm): He wrote that I edit my blog posts. Yes, and he fabricated posts that I never wrote.

I hereby post today's lesson about writing. Sometimes I edit my posts, both on this blog and on my other blog, because I am striving to be a better writer. One problem with the Blogspot format is that the Preview feature sucks, so the best way for me to tell if a post needs revision is to post it and then review it. Oh, and do I need to add that this is my blog, which means I can edit posts any time I please? I didn't think so.

Isn't it just too bad the bully won't edit HIS posts-and himself-out of the blogsphere?

Class dismissed.

March 23- Over the weekend, a few of us were discussing the hundreds of abusive and threatening blog comments that I have received from Thomas Churchwell over the past month.

Starting today, his comments will be routed to another site and reviewed by someone else.

The site will be a dumping ground.

The link:

http://churchwelldumpingground.blogspot.com/

A Pile Of Evidence

2009-03-13T20:30:00.183-04:00

March 17- This morning, Thomas Churchwell accused me of emailing one of the underage girls who recently posed for lewd pictures in his apartment. While sending her a warning might be advisable, given his claim that she is just 16, I did not email her. He also accused me this morning of writing a blog about this girl. I have heard there is a blog being written about underage "models", or a blog written by them, but I had nothing whatever to do with it.

Thomas Churchwell rejects reality. Due to his personality disorders (he posted his diagnosis on his blog last summer), he apparently is unable to hold a job, so he spends his days writing cruel, jealous lies about bloggers. Recently, he has been impersonating me on dozens of websites, including GretaWire, writing disgusting comments in my name about the mentally ill. I found out about this when my mailbox was flooded with confirmation emails to sites and newsletters that he had subscribed me to. When not writing libel and taking snap shots of teenagers in their underpants, he is idle. He has no apparent goal in life except to type the word "hate" a billion times before he dies.

He would have you believe that I am classless, ignorant and criminally-minded like him. But in fact, I am a very nice woman (though not a pushover), a loyal friend, and devoted daughter. I loved a man who struggled with manic depression. I don't hate anybody. I am a college graduate and hold an upper graduate degree in the fine arts. People say I'm pretty (though I often don't believe them), I work hard at my craft and have a relationship with a nice man who has made something of himself. I am repulsed by men who bully women.

Unlike Churchwell I've never been in jail, or beaten or blinded anyone, or been diagnosed by 17 psychiatrists, or had children who I abandoned (he denies the existence of two of his children, but his ex-girlfriend says there are three); I have never loafed through life aimlessly attacking innocent people on the Internet. This is Thomas Churchwell's resume. The only one he has.

A man who attacks a woman physically or verbally is a creep. There are no exceptions and no excuses.

Thomas Churchwell attacks women to get attention. He has to know that if he stopped his attacks, everyone would praise God for peace and never write another word about him. There would be no reason to continue this blog, if he would just stop.

In the Google Reader, he posted this today:

"My wordpress blog was successfully hacked and taken over by cyber bully Scarlett S and I reported it last week. She seemed to manage to get in and write horrible things pretending to be me to justify her writing hatred on her site about me and my business."

No wonder people call Thomas Churchwell a nasty liar. First of all, I don't know how to "hack" a blog. Secondly, I haven't been to his awful blogs in more than two years. He threatened to hack MY blog a week ago. That is the truth. Thirdly, he has no "business." Let's be very clear about his Wordpress hate site. He closed it himself right after he published his death threats. Now, he is trying to disavow even writing them! Shows that he is plenty scared.

I thought it would be a good idea to post one of Thomas Churchwell's recent death threats on my blog. The reason I am putting it here is to assist the police, who are being inundated with links to my blog, according to Churchwell. The mayor of my town, who Churchwell states he will soon contact, as part of "March Madness" month (his new phrase for terrorizing me, readers) will no doubt be interested in his threats, as will the FBI.

He has written literally hundreds, if not thousands, of defamation posts about me. He floods this inbox, and my other inbox, with abuse every day, but death threats are a whole different ball game. I have a pile of his threats from this week alone. A pile of evidence.

You see, I found out that local police rarely do anything about these situations, until a stalker shows up at the victim's house, or worse, after he has killed her. But I am not daunted. Thomas Churchwell has been broadcasting his brand of terrorism to the world, and sooner or later he will accidentally link my blog to someone who will bring him to justice for threatening my life.

Death threat from his Wordpress site:
I would shoot her until the gun was empty Mar 9, 2009
from CHURCHWELL by churchwell

A fan emailed me and ask me what I would do if I found out where she lived. My response is: “I would shoot her 1000 times even after she was dead I would continue to shoot.”
March 10, 2009 1:07 PM

Thomas Tarquin Churchwell and Kids

2009-02-24T12:50:00.130-05:00

Attention New (Greta Wire) Readers: I heard that Thomas Churchwell, a stalker on my blog, has been saying the author of my blog is Susan a/k/a Suzi. That is a stupid lie. My name is Scarlett, and I am the only author.

Update: After flooding my inbox with more than 300 lurid and threatening comments this week, Thomas Churchwell ran back to his own site tonight to dupe bloggers from Greta Wire.

Thomas Churchwell is a known liar, bully, stalker, and ex-convict. If new readers can stomach a factual account of his shady doings on the Internet, you are welcome to read my blog in its entirety.

As for Susan a/k/a Suzi, she and Thomas Churchwell have been locked in a symbolic death dance on the blogs for years. But their intrigues have nothing to do with me.

Thomas Churchwell has spent three years writing malicious lies about me. He began soon after I befriended him on a message board in 2006 (fortunately, we never met). He seemed to be grieving over the murdered socialite Christa Worthington and I felt sorry for him. But after talking with him for about three weeks, I found out that his long ago "romance" with Ms. Worthington had been brief, that she had let him stay in her apartment out of pity, because he was living in the Bowery, and that she soon threw his belongings into the street, sick of his mooching. All of this is documented in Maria Flook's book Invisible Eden. I caught him in several other lies. For example, he told me that he was a famous retired magician when, in fact, he was living in a lock-down building in Queens, his only income being the monthly government disability check that he receives because he once beat a man and blinded him, and subsequently, was deemed too anti-social to live on his own. Once I discovered the truth about him, I ended our chats, and the very next day he began his attacks on me.

This page was started by me two years ago as a defense blog against his libel. I also hoped it would serve as a helpful resource for other victims of cyber bullying. I have tried to ignore the literally hundreds of defamatory posts that Thomas Churchwell has written about me in his relentless attempts to destroy my reputation and my photography career, but as I have found out again and again, ignoring him doesn't stop the abuse. For this reason, I have periodically added posts to this page, and tonight I felt it was necessary to do so again, after he spewed lies about me on Greta's very public blog. Fortunately, I am blessed with a wonderful support system.

Here's something you can take to the bank. My blog is NOT written by Susan/Suzi. Along with the fact that her writing style is different than mine, there are one or two posts here that are not exactly flattering to her ( I wrote them after SHE libeled me last fall). If you know Susan/Suzi/Sammie/Deb from the Greta Wire blog, then you know that she has an ego as large as the Internet and would never write anything unflattering about herself.

The following is the post that actually belongs with the above post title. Thomas Churchwell would like to see it slide on down the page.

This issue needs to be addressed about Thomas Churchwell.

In a blog post this morning, he wrote this filthy lie again:

"How funny that this one hater from North Carolina... Her writing about me as a 10 year old having sex with my teacher is writing child porn and just because I know that and I post what she does doesn’t make me a person interested in child porn. No, it makes me a man who is complaining that someone is using my name in their child porn writings."

People know that I NEVER wrote a story about Churchwell as a 10 year old having sex with a teacher. KMA wrote a blog comment about Churchwell and a teacher. His old blog fan KMA. However, KMA's comment was about a teacher spanking Churchwell - not having sex with him.

Update: I just found the story. Churchwell posted it on this site. Be warned, if you go there, that it is a kiddie porn website.

How did I find it so fast? Simple, I typed "kiddie porn + Tarquin Churchwell" in a search bar and it came up on the first page:

(click on image to enlarge)

The version on the porn site contains many of the same grammatical errors and misspellings that are often found on Churchwell's own blog every day, suggesting that Churchwell altered the story himself.

I had nothing to do with this. It doesn't make sense and, clearly, it is not my style of writing:

"Upon further investigation into Tarquins (sic) early years it seems his mother was called to the principals (sic) office when Tar was a mere 10yo. (sic) Seems Tar had sex with his 4th grade teacher & was being sent home w/mom. Mom called Dad to come home and handle the uncomfortable challange (sic) of discussing what happened at school. Dad & Tar when (sic) for a ride to talk about what happened. Dad said it was normal to have fantisies (sic) about some of his teachers "but perhaps it was not such a good thing to act them out and maybe we should all just try & put this all ~behind~ us and go home and hopefully he best not do it again." Tar said: "Gee thanks for understanding Dad." And they went home. As they were pulling into the driveway Tar says "Hey Dad, do you think you can give me a ride over to my friend Billys (sic) house?" Whereupon his Dad said "Why son why not take your bike & ride it over there?" To which little Tarquin replies: "Yeah, well I would Dad... But my butt is really hurting." And now Tarquin wants to 'give it back' - what he learned at school - To anyone who crosses him or Ha Ha - "Lies". Where (sic) on to you fella -You are in need of serious help. You know: 'Unresolvedchildhood' (sic) "issues" still linger. The more you dish it out the more we gonna put it wherethe (sic) sun don't shine!"

Now here is Churchwell again, still on the same kiddie porn site, impersonating KMA in another comment. You can tell he's excited:

"I'm KMA. I own Cape Cod today. A very successfull (sic) online website about Cape Cod. I let people write about anything they want. I write about children sex. I love writing about children having sex. Come to Cape Cod today and read some of my stories. I like to write about the child sex of magician Tarquin Churchwell."

I don't know KMA, but it's a matter of public record that he was never an owner of Cape Cod Today. He would have had no conceivable reason to write that bizarre comment, whereas Churchwell had a beef with Cape Cod Today (they had shut down his blog). Evidently, he decided to slur both KMA and the editor of the paper in one swoop.

Churchwell's post today, along with the post on the kiddie porn site, proves that he has been lying all along. Lying about the innocent woman from North Carolina (me), because he wants attention. Attention Thomas Churchwell shouldn't want, because his writings broadcast to the world that he can't stop fixating on children. Everyone expects him to be classless, ignorant and a hater of women, that's a given. But I would suggest keeping child exploitation and writing about children in a sexual way out of his public displays of hate. To the world, this says that he is a pedophile.

Hate Blogger THOMAS CHURCHWELL Needs An Intervention

2009-02-12T14:50:00.213-05:00

To his PSYCHIATRIST: I remember you viewed my site last summer. I hope you are doing so again. Your patient's irrational behavior has worsened since he was removed from SUS, and as one of his cyber victims, I have to ask you again to do something about him. I realize that personality disorders cannot be cured. There is no medical miracle for Thomas Churchwell's problem, but surely he can be controlled in some way? I read his psychiatric DSM classification, borderline axis IV, signed by Dr. Patel, and posted by Churchwell himself on his blog last summer. It stated that people in his classification are prone to engage in "petty thefts and extreme sexual perversion." He repeatedly accuses me and others of the same repulsive behavior that defines his own behavior: stealing and child pornography. He types the words "child porn" over and over, obviously getting pleasure from it. If this were not the case, he would not have been doing it for years, would he? As for his "photo thief" lie, I have never stolen another photographer's work. Your patient has a history of stealing. He bragged on his site that before serving time in Riker's Prison for almost killing a man and blinding him, he was a pickpocket. I am sick and tired of being the "fall guy" for his anti-social behavior. Wouldn't you agree that smearing the reputations of innocent people is wrong, Doctor? The libel he wrote about my photography in my hometown newspaper was yanked by the editor, but his other writings will be circling the Web forever. He stalks my two blogs every day. Today, he left more than 20 threatening comments. I didn't publish them, though I would be glad to send them to you.

Your patient targeted me in 2006 simply because I talked to him on the Internet for two or three weeks. When I realized he was a liar, I ended the conversations, and he began his attacks on me the next day. He seems to think that he is a photographer and that I am a fraud, but it's the other way around. He also seems to think that he is entitled to destroy my blog, my relationships, my photography business, drive me off the Internet, and threaten my life. My immediate request is that you do something about him, be it stronger medication, or putting him to work, so that he doesn't have so much idle time to act out; whatever it takes to end his tyranny. You can contact me at bloggingright@yahoo.com.

Every time Thomas Churchwell writes filth about women, he is telling you that he is a misogynist.

He likes to say those old parody blogs, published more than a year ago in response to his hate writings about women, is the reason for his unhappy life. Don't buy into the BS. He was acting out years before the parody blogs were ever written, and apparently has been unhappy all of his life.

It's worth noting that the parody blogs were never vicious, libelous or threatening like his own writings about me and many others.

Further, only a sociopath would say that parody blogs, of all things, are a justification for more misogyny, more lies and blackmail, and that threatening others, as he did today, is okay. It is not.

I'm not going to address the filth that Thomas Churchwell wrote about me today. I have been there and done that many times. Everyone already knows that his posts about me are nothing but lies trumped up by a mean, warped, sexually sick mind.

As for the lesser bully, I don't know what part, if any, Susan played in his post today. She may be too busy disrupting the Greta blog to make trouble for me. But I imagine that she is belly laughing over this. She is very much like Churchwell. In fact, the only thing that separates them is education.

To everyone reading this, please learn from my experience. What happened to me is a lesson for anyone who thinks trust can be handed out on the Web like candy. I trusted Churchwell and Susan when I met them online, and look where it got me. Just assume that everyone you meet on the Internet is a stalker, and then you might be pleasantly surprised, as you get to know an online stranger over a long period of time. Be careful out there.

Harassing Blog Comments Faked By Thomas Churchwell Today

2009-01-25T20:15:00.104-05:00

First, I want to remind readers that I have a new blog. It is about the real me--not the delusional version of me as concocted by the woman hater. I am blogging there as often as I can, aiming to keep my posts interesting and worth your time. I truly appreciate your support and hope you will visit often!

Here's the link.

That was the good news. The bad news is that Thomas Churchwell, wanting you to know that he is still a bully and stalker, today faked blog comments in my name, on his wordpress site, according to his post in the Google Reader.

I Have A New Blog!

2009-01-20T19:00:00.015-05:00

Ladies and gentlemen, over the weekend I moved many of the posts on this page to a brand new location. The link is at the bottom of the post.

A couple of months ago this blog had an identity crisis, when I wrote a few humorous posts, as an experiment, and the result was a confusing mix of funny posts and serious rebuttals against Thomas Churchwell's libel.

This blog will stay here as a resource and archive. I appreciate most of you who have read my posts. I'm especially thankful to those who have posted comments here.

Link to new site.

Thomas Churchwell Threatens Lies To Yahoo About Scarlett

2009-01-08T22:09:00.076-05:00

Yahoo: if you are reading this post, feel free to review my site in its entirety. Thomas Churchwell sent threats to my blog stating that he is going to "get Yahoo" to ban me from the Internet. Yes, and he said that Yahoo is conspiring with him.

To the bully: When I reported your copyright theft of my photograph of a watch and Christmas ornament to Yahoo (who owns Flickr) in 2007, they told me that they already had 3 complaints about you. That is a fact.

Today you gave yourself away. In the Google Reader I saw that you wrote on your hate site, in reference to your libel about me: "I will be frack..." (must have meant 'frank') "...that I'm having fun." This underscores the disgusting truth about you, that you are a bully writing horrible lies about me for kicks. There is no other reason for what you are doing, and now you have admitted it.

LEAVE THIS BLOG AND DON'T COME BACK.

Stop trying to ruin my photography business and my blog. Leave me alone.

Thomas Churchwell Puts Words In Scarlett's Mouth She Never Said

2009-01-03T07:09:00.193-05:00

Thomas Churchwell, about your recent Wordpress libel posts, stop putting quotation marks around words I never said. I NEVER had those conversations that you're posting. Not with you, or anyone else.

Regarding your screwball allegations, do a Google image search for "nude pictures." Type it in a search bar, and you will get more than 6,000,000 hits. An astonishing number and why do you suppose there are that many? Because people share pictures on the Internet! There are billions of images, from apples to zylophones, on Yahoo and Google that are being posted and reposted on blogs every day.

I find it almost funny that you are playing blog police about public domain pictures, given your checkered past as a confessed pickpocket as well as thief of my commercial photography. The fact is, anyone who has a blog—and there are 70,000,000 blogs—has posted public domain photos, sometimes called stock photos, that can be found in any image search. If this is "stealing" in your mind, then that means there are approximately 70,000,000 thieves running loose on the Internet. Hilarious.

Stealing applies to a copyright signature, or some other warning against posting a picture—such as the warning I gave you to stop posting my commercial photography. The nudies had no signatures, no warnings, no copyrights.

And keep in mind that I didn't post those photos. You did. You copied photos to your computer that you like to say were "stolen" and you have been posting them on your sites for three years. You have the credibility of a gnat.

Readers, in case you don't know the facts about Thomas Churchwell, he was diagnosed as being psychotic. For unknown reasons, perhaps to get attention, he posted his psychiatrist's diagnosis on his own blog last summer. As for the nudie pictures, it is worth mentioning that I wouldn't have had that type of picture in my files, had he not pushed me repeatedly during those few weeks I talked with him in 2006. Since I wasn't about to comply with his demands for nude pictures of myself, I put the public domain pictures in my documents file (after he started pouting), so that he could ogle them instead. Telling you that people can't share pictures in Yahoo Instant Messenger is another of his loony lies, and easily disproved. He needs to discuss with his doctors his ambivalent feelings about women, namely, his lust and all-consuming hate, instead of continuing in the same vein as a highly disruptive presence on the Internet. For all concerned, I hope he will stop his outrageous libel of me and others.

Recapping, the last contact I had with Thomas Churchwell, off the blogs, was in 2006 when he pressured me into putting nude pictures on the IM. He really wanted "crotch shots," he told me, and was very disappointed when he didn't get any. He copied much tamer snaps of unknown women to his computer, while I was talking to him on the IM. The women's faces had been cropped by the uncredited persons who snapped the photos.

The day after he uploaded the pictures, I told him what I thought he already knew, that the pictures weren't actually me. He believed they were me (he claimed), as if nice women go around the Web showing pictures of their breasts to strangers! This gets to the core of Churchwell's gripe and it has nothing to do with his allegations that the pictures were stolen. Given his history of stealing, he wouldn't have cared if those pictures had been swiped from Hugh Hefner's safe. No, he is still nursing a grudge over being "tricked," as he sees it. He pressured me for nude pictures and believes to this day that he was entitled to have them!

Churchwell, you began your attacks on me the day after I ended our conversations in 2006. As part of your revenge, you published my commercial still-life photograph of a watch and Christmas ornament on at least four websites. You defaced my Christmas photography with one of your software programs and published the defiled version alongside the copyrighted original. When I found out, you refused to remove the photos from Photobucket, Flickr, LiveJournal and Blogger. You then filed a bogus claim on Photobucket against my copyright, which is a crime, and libeled me all over the Internet as a thief of my own photography! Recently, you admitted on your site that I am the photographer of that image.

Since your former "career" was pickpocket in a strip bar, where you helped yourself to watches and wallets (according to brags in your own blog posts), and since you recently stole my copyright of a commercial photograph, you are the last person in the world who should be calling anyone a thief.

People think you are a LOON. And, if your recent posts with the bogus conversations are another bully scheme, you may as well stop. I am NOT closing my blog.

Got it?

And stop stalking my site. Seeing you refresh my page dozens of times a day (at all hours) is obsessive and makes me wonder if there isn’t something better that you can occupy your time with. Perhaps getting a job?

Loose Ends

2008-12-31T18:07:00.020-05:00

For the most part, I dislike FAQs. They’re generally filled with pointless information such as meticulous lists of the author’s favorite foods, as if anyone cares other than family and friends. However, the difference between the average everyday FAQ and this one is that people actually asked me this stuff. Since today is the last day of 2008, I think it's a good time to tie up loose ends. So, here you go.

1. Why do you write anonymously? I’ll never take anything you say seriously unless you’re willing to put your full name on it.

For all you know, everyone writes anonymously, but you just believe them when they signed their posts ‘Sarah Goodbody.’ The name is only important when the author is an egomaniac demanding attention for everything he writes, whether it is true, or not. Egomaniacs scream, "Look at me!" I am not one of those.

For me, the ideas presented are important. I couldn't care less what the name is. Besides, with cyber bullies and stalkers prowling the Internet, it's just plain dumb to blog under your real full name.

Artists and authors have been using pen names and pseudonyms for generations now, so baiters such as Thomas Tarquin Churchwell should stop acting like this is some odd phenomenon.

Mark Twain. Richard Bachman. Meatloaf. Prince. Madonna. Lemony Snicket. J.K Rowling. Fiona Apple. Nicolas Bourbaki. George Eliot. Irving Berlin. Bono. Cher. Elvis Costello. Mick Jagger. Rudyard Kipling. Spike Lee. Jerry Lewis. George Orwell. Lewis Carroll. Sting.

All these names are either partially accurate or completely fake.

Of course, the fact of the matter is that I have revealed my real first name in this blog's title. Anyone wanting more than that should show me that they can be trusted!

2. What was your motivation for starting this site?

World peace.

Is there anyone who doesn't know why I started this site?

I had to set the record straight about the vicious lies that Thomas Tarquin Churchwell has been writing about me every day for almost three years.

Also, I love to write. Beyond that, I have no delusions of grandeur. I really am a photographer, although I never said that I am a famous photographer. Furthermore, I am not gunning for a TV show, a book deal, a spot on a panel, Internet super stardom or an interview with Oprah. I write simply because I have things to say. There is no other reason.

3. For a long time you didn't allow comments on your site. Why?

Well, I think that’s pretty obvious, don’t you?

Every time I allowed comments on my blog, I was bombarded with sick, unprintable anonymous comments, all written by Churchwell.

4. Have you become cynical about blogging?

No way!

One of the reasons I felt relatively comfortable meeting other bloggers two years ago, was because I was under the assumption — and this theory required a leap of faith which required that I accept the innate goodness of man — that if an individual could tie words together and make a sentence that communicated a thought, it meant that he had adequate control over his mental faculties, that he was not crazy, or at least not dangerous, or at least medicated enough to be acceptable to society. I was so naive. Now that I am wiser, I still believe that most bloggers are nice people.

5. Yesterday, Thomas Churchwell wrote another hateful essay about you and Susan, in which he claimed that he has "control of your blogs.." He wrote: "The creatures are being held at bay." Did this upset you?

LOL.

6. Do you think he will ever give up bullying?

I think that if he faces certain truths about himself, he might stop beating up women on the Internet.

I hope you will have much fun tonight! See you tomorrow.

Why Do Bullies Hate Women?

2008-12-18T00:05:00.027-05:00

When I came home tonight after attending a dinner party where all the guests seemed normal, I started thinking about that phrase from the play "The Mourning Bride" by William Congreve, an English author of the early eighteenth century. You know the one: "Heaven has no rage like love to hatred turned, nor hell a fury like a woman scorned." When you think of these few words, you automatically think of a woman who has been jilted by the one she loves and wants to viciously strike back. However, have you ever wondered how a bully responds, if he is the one who is jilted?

This thinking/wondering came about as a result of a cyber bully who trolls my blog and leaves disparaging, rude, libelous, abusive, and threatening comments. Sometimes this type of behavior accelerates into death threats, as it has with me. Most cyber bullies - 90% - are men. So, I started wondering just why do some men hate women to the extent that they'd do this.

I started doing some Googling and discovered, not to my surprise, that there's a lot out there on this topic. Some write about this phenomenon being the result of original sin when Eve took and ate the forbidden fruit and then blamed it on Adam. That fruit, by the way, was a symbol of knowledge, something that Adam couldn't supply. Some actually believe that this story is central to the oppression of women worldwide.

Did you know that the English language has 220 words (almost all derogatory) for a female and only 20 for a male (almost all complimentary). Consider the following: A 'master' exercises authority, whereas a 'mistress' is a so-called kept woman. The term 'sir' retains respect, while 'madam' refers to someone who keeps a brothel. A 'lord of all he surveys' is quite different from a 'lady of the streets', and the meaning of 'he's a professional' is generally understood differently from 'she's a professional'. (from "Why Men Hate Women" by Celia Kitzinger, new internationalist issue 212 - October 1990).

We also find that misogyny is present when a woman runs for political office. More often than not, a female candidate is dismissed as either being "too hard" (Hillary Clinton), or an idiot. Take Sarah Palin, who, because she speaks with a Midwestern twang and sprinkles her speeches with colloquialisms such as "Okay doke," was regarded by many as a silly choice, and not altogether bright (she was judged dumb by the media for the way she talked). But if a male running for political office speaks with a twang - and everyone from the Midwest does - there are no smirks from the TV pundits.

Susan Forward, PhD, a leading psychotherapist states: "Once we begin to examine the forces that drive the woman hater, we find that much of his abusive behavior is a cover-up for his anxiety about women. This man needs, as we all do, to feel safe. As adults most men fulfill these yearnings through physical intimacy, emotional sharing and parenting. But the woman hater finds these yearnings terribly frightening. He harbors a hidden belief that if he cares for a woman, she will then have the power to hurt him, to engulf him and to abandon him. Once he has invested her with these awesome and mythical powers, she becomes a fearful figure for him."

She goes on to explain that the woman hater's conflicting emotions of yearning and fear result in behaviors of hostility, aggression, contempt and cruelty. "Early childhood plays a role in contributing to this misogynistic behavior. In an ideal situation, a mother nurtures and is a boy’s primary source of comfort, while fathers help pull the boy away from mother so that he does not become overly dependent on her. If you look closely at the childhood of a woman hater, the father was probably either too passive to pull the boy from the mother, or he was a bully himself, and consequently, the boy had no option but to make his mother the center of his universe."

"Without realizing it, in adult life he transfers this dependency, as well as conflicts and fears that go with it, onto the woman in his life. The woman hater saw his mother as having the power to frustrate him, to withhold love from him, to smother him, to make him feel weak, or to make insatiable demands on him"—and as an adult he views women as having these same powers."

This partly explains why the cyber bully Thomas Churchwell hates women bloggers. The irony is that if he bumped into me on the street, and saw that I am not any of the things he writes about me, but that I am a nice, ordinary girl, he would run away shame-faced. Maybe. Of course, then he wouldn't mind meeting a new online target to assuage his childhood traumas.

I used to feel some sympathy towards this type of man because, no matter what, something terrible happened to him early that skewed his image of women. But now I believe that he doesn't deserve any sympathy except from his psychiatrist.

The Truth About Churchwell's "Photo Thief" Lie

2008-12-15T21:47:00.076-05:00

Calling me a photo thief is outrageous.

This lie is closely connected to your own past. Stealing was your profession for a time, according to what you wrote in your blog posts. Remember?

I have never stolen "pictures off the Internet". Yet, you continue to write this lie. You attack me without any cause or provocation.

You have bragged on your blogs that you are a "psycho" and have said more than once that "17 psychiatrists" all agree you're nuts. If that is true, you have no credibility. You can't be mentally ill, and at the same time, expect anyone to believe you when you call me a photo thief. So, what is the point?

You can ponder that question, or not. As for me, I am blogging on my own blog. You drove me away from a blog I wrote last year. This time, you're not driving me away.

About The Breaking News Blog

2008-11-19T21:15:00.013-05:00

If anyone is interested, here's what I heard about the Breaking News parody blog. Currently it's closed, because someone flagged it as "spam." Which may mean sabotage, a hacker, or an overly zealous bot that goofed? The good news is, Thomas Tarquin Churchwell's phony allegations of the blog being "hate" was not the cause.

Now Playing

2008-11-18T21:14:00.001-05:00

Susan Newton, Stop Your Libel

2008-10-06T17:04:00.043-04:00

By Scarlett

Here is the revision of a comment I wrote on the Breaking News blog concerning Susan Newton of San Rafael, California, with a few points added:

Do you really think you're fooling anyone with this game? People are not stupid, Susan. They know you are having a major MELTDOWN, because you're afraid that you're about to lose your slap and slur partner on the blogs: Thomas Churchwell.

In a pathetic attempt to get his attention, you are attacking me. For a solid week you have taken the hate that you usually post about him and thrown it at me instead. Libeling me a "hatemonger" "Southern bigot" and "alleged" photographer, of all things. You are a LIAR.

About the racial hate you posted, I don't hate blacks, and I am sure that Southerners are disgusted by your small-minded, stereotypical prejudices. "Southerners hate blacks." How IGNORANT of you to think people will buy this BS in the year 2008. That's like saying everyone in California, your home state, is a space cadet.

I am a professional photographer. This is what I do for a LIVING. Got that?

The attack you launched on my dead father was despicable. My father was an honorable man, a good Catholic and faithful to my mother.

As for you writing that I "tracked you down" in a hotel two years ago, why do you want to think that women are pursuing you? What does this say about YOUR sexual persuasion and fantasies? Fact is, you POSTED the name of the hotel on your blog, and that was not the first time you asked me to call you. You were just dying to get the ball rolling on your ridiculing, obsessive chats about Churchwell. Of course, you have obsessed about me for two years, also. If I didn't answer the phone when you called, you kept calling and calling until I did. This is a FACT.

I didn't read the rest of your crackpot post, but I imagine it's you giving yourself more airs (your "busy person" charade) and regurgitating the lies you wrote last week. You must be a miserable person.

I realize that you need help. And while I don't care what happens to you, for the sake of innocent people who encounter you on the Internet, especially women, I think you should resume therapy.

Finally, stop referring to me on your blog as "honey." You think people don't know that you are knifing me in the back?

Leave me alone.
October 6, 2008 2:26 PM

Thomas Tarquin Churchwell: Stop. Leave Me Alone

2008-10-01T19:37:00.009-04:00

I do not know Thomas Tarquin Churchwell from Queens, NY and Portsmouth, New Hampshire, except as a bully on the Internet, and stalker of my blog. He enjoys seeing his name splashed across the Internet. I do not. I do not enjoy being cyber bullied, libeled and stalked. I have asked him to stop many times.

Please leave me alone. Go away. Stop blogging lies about me.

LEAVE ME ALONE.

Susan Newton Desperate For Thomas Churchwell's Love, Defames Scarlett

2008-09-30T13:00:00.009-04:00

By Scarlett

I will address the lunatic post Susan Newton wrote this morning, but right now, I have to go to work. I'll set the record straight later.

Screenshot of Fake Comment

2008-08-01T12:41:00.010-04:00

By Scarlett

From the Google Reader, this screenshot was posted by Thomas Churchwell on his blog July 30. An imposter wrote the first comment. The IP address is Susan's.

I never go to his blog.

Fake Comments in Scarlett's Name

2008-07-31T18:03:00.017-04:00

By Scarlett

A screenshot in the Google Reader shows that you, Susan, apparently have been writing blog comments in my name on Thomas Churchwell's blog. I don't know why you're doing this, but please stop.

I never go to his blogs or yours.