Man Charged With Threatening Merriam-Webster Over Gender Definitions

The man, Jeremy David Hanson, 34, threatened in October to shoot and bomb the company’s offices because of its definitions of “girl,” “boy,” “trans woman” and other words, federal authorities said.

A California man was arrested this week on charges that he sent messages to Merriam-Webster in which he threatened to shoot and bomb its offices because he didn’t like the company’s dictionary definitions relating to gender identity, the authorities said.
The man, Jeremy David Hanson of Rossmoor, Calif., who was arrested in California on Tuesday, threatened to kill every employee of the Massachusetts-based company, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Massachusetts said in a statement on Friday.
He was charged with one count of interstate communication of threats to commit violence and released on conditions in California, the statement said. He is set to appear in U.S. District Court in Massachusetts on April 29.

From Oct. 2 to Oct. 8, 2021, Mr. Hanson, 34, sent anonymous comments and messages to Merriam-Webster, which publishes a widely used online dictionary, condemning the company for changing the definitions of words including “boy, “girl” and “trans woman,” according to an affidavit filed by an F.B.I. agent this month.

“There is no such thing as ‘gender identity,’” he wrote in a comment about the definition of “female.” “The imbecile who wrote this entry should be hunted down and shot.”

One of Merriam-Webster’s definitions of female is “having a gender identity that is the opposite of male.”




Mr. Hanson escalated his threats from there, sending messages saying that the company’s headquarters should be “shot up and bombed,” the statement said. He wrote that, by changing certain gender-based definitions, the company was taking part in efforts to “degrade the English language and deny reality.”

In October, Merriam-Webster reported the threats to the F.B.I., which tracked Mr. Hanson through his I.P. address, the bureau’s affidavit said. Because of the threats, the company closed its offices in Springfield, Mass., and New York for five days, prosecutors said.

It was not clear if Mr. Hanson had a lawyer. Messages left at a phone number listed under his name on Friday night were not immediately returned.

His mother told investigators that her son had autism and was “fixated on transgender issues,” the affidavit said.

In recent years, Merriam-Webster, the country’s oldest dictionary publisher, has updated certain definitions to be more inclusive of shifting attitudes around gender.

Representatives for the company did not immediately return emails or phone calls seeking comment on Friday night.
“Hate-filled threats and intimidations have no place in our society,” Rachael S. Rollins, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts, said in the statement.

Prosecutors said that while they were investigating Mr. Hanson’s messages, they found threats that they believed he had made to the American Civil Liberties Union, Hasbro, Land O’Lakes, a New York rabbi and others. He repeatedly used the word “Marxist,” they said.

In the statement from the U.S. attorney’s office, Joseph R. Bonavolonta, the special agent in charge of the F.B.I.’s Boston division, said that Mr. Hanson’s threats “crossed a line.”

“Everyone has a right to express their opinion,’’ Mr. Bonavolonta said. “but repeatedly threatening to kill people, as has been alleged, takes it to a new level.”

 
He wrote that, by changing certain gender-based definitions, the company was taking part in efforts to “degrade the English language and deny reality.”
He isn't wrong
“Hate-filled threats and intimidations have no place in our society,” Rachael S. Rollins, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Massachusetts, said in the statement.
Says the company changing gender definitions because of hate filled threats and intimidations.

Dude is clearly unhinged, but that doesn't mean he isn't right.
 
Is saying x should be bombed a threat? I mean saying you’re going to bomb x is clearly a threat, but saying it should be?
Does this mean we can get Rhys McKinnon arrested for saying women should die in a grease fire? Should is not will. Be interesting to see how this goes in court.
 
There are better ways to vent your frustration about this stuff. My way is to post here about how transwomen are men and nothing they can do will ever change that fact.
I won't tolerate such hateful speech. You have been reported to the cyber police buddy boy, you better take the thong out yo bussy now player
 
Is saying x should be bombed a threat? I mean saying you’re going to bomb x is clearly a threat, but saying it should be?
Does this mean we can get Rhys McKinnon arrested for saying women should die in a grease fire? Should is not will. Be interesting to see how this goes in court.
I am an euro, so I don't know that much about US law, but my understanding is that it was decided numerous times by the supreme court that "abstract advocacy of violence" is not punishable. The most prominent ruling on that is Brandenburg v. Ohio.
In that case it would have been illegal for Brandenburg to point to a fine black citizen and shout to an audience "KILL THAT NIGGER", because that would have been incitement to commit an immediate crime. Talking in a group and saying something like "NIGGERS SHOULD GET HANGED" would not be punishable because it is abstract and not immediate.
 
This is the first time I’ve heard this even mentioned. The merriam webster offices have been infiltrated by the woke mob and they have been and are changing our definitions to fit their agenda for several years now. This is real and this is scary and nobody is talking about it but some sperg who issued threats over it.
 
Free My Nigga
cbc20a80fc86dba336f8346e6447469b7f7ec7a7ff44359a7e5290586765c90d.jpg
 
“The imbecile who wrote this entry should be hunted down and shot.”
Weird how each of the cited "threats" discuss what should happen. That's a protected opinion under the first amendment, very different than threatening to actually do it. Likewise I can say people should take inspiration from Timothy McVeigh and recreate his work daily for these rights abridging assholes. That in no way says I'm going to do it, I'm not planning to do it. I simply have the legally protected opinion that in a just world that is what would happen.
 
Agreed on both counts, but I'd still say it's a better idea to use a VPN or proxy than just sending death threats from your own IP.
No doubt, but some of them keep data they should not (like logging IPs) and will surrender it to law enforcement at the mere whisper of 'terrorist'. Yes, basic Op Sec would be to use a VPN or a device that's used maybe once and crushed.
 
Might be wiser to something else not easily tied to him, a throwaway cell phone (like for registering Twitter accounts to abuse journoscum, although I prefer something like this), than using his own computer to issue words that got the FBI closely interesting in him. David Jeremy Hanson was bit unwise.
 
Back