Thread by @PhilWMagness

Again, my *only* interaction with this person...well...ever was to challenge a particular claim from her defense of the 1619 Project on twitter.

Her entire response, then and now, is bizarre ad hominem while simultaneously claiming to be a "victim."

It's a truly bizarre spectacle, because Araujo's comments are invariably dependent on obscenities and even outright sexism and racism.

Suppose she engaged students in her classroom with demeaning and sexist language such as calling them "puppy" or "boy."

She would face a Title IX investigation, and the complaint would be entirely valid.

Here is how Araujo initiated our one and only exchange to date after I criticized the 1619 Project's overreliance on Ed Baptist's debunked arguments.

When others legitimately criticized the juvenile nature of Araujo's "your momma" insults and other derogatory remarks, she resorted to...outright sexism by attacking their gender.

Not just once either. It's as if gratuitous sexism is Araujo's default position.

It'd be one thing if Araujo was just a random troll, in which case she could be ignored. Instead she's a professor at @HowardU and on the editorial board of
@AmHistReview.

One wonders: does she extend similar sexism and belligerent obscenity to her students? To AHR submissions?

@HowardU @AmHistReview For example, does she also tell students who question Ed Baptist's error-riddled book in her classroom to "go f*ck themselves"?

Would an article submission to the AHR that challenged Baptist be desk-rejected by Araujo, & its author(s) told to "go f*ck themselves"?

@HowardU @AmHistReview I'm far from the only person she's attacked in this way.

Araujo's sexist and juvenile use of "your mom" insults appear to be a common theme of her twitter behavior.

@HowardU @AmHistReview It appears to be something of a default insult for her.